In the wake of the Title IX scandal at BYU, it came to light that not only was BYU opening an honor code investigation on all who reported that they were raped (regardless of whether any honor code violation was involved in their assault), but also that students may have an honor code investigation file they don’t know about. It was further brought to light that students can request a copy of their file and can read it.
Brad Levin, who spearheaded the FreeBYU movement [1], petitioned to receive a copy of his Honor Code file although he had never been told that he had been investigated. He found that there was an 11-page file on him, including an anonymous tip from a “friend” who was concerned that he had been involved with “homosexual ideas” because he published a paper entitled “Homosexuality: A Straight BYU Student’s Perspective.” It was determined that no action would be taken against him as a result of this investigation.
Instructions on how current and former BYU students can obtain a copy of their file can be found here [2]. FERPA rules require the Honor Code Office to comply, with a few caveats:
- They have 45 days to assemble and send your file.
- You have to pay for the copies before they will send them.
- If you live within a “reasonable commute” of campus, they will not provide you copies but will allow you to read your file in a supervised room and take notes.
- Records older than 7 years may no longer be available.
- Getting an Honor Code ruling overturned is about as likely as getting gravity overturned.
- The names of your accusers will be redacted, whereas sullying your name is completely copacetic.
Other rights outlined on the ATHCOE site:
- The right to stay in your housing. You cannot be evicted on the basis of religion, sexual orientation, or other protected classes, even if you are expelled on the basis of these factors.
- The right to request corrections to your Honor Code file, have an administrative review if you are suspended, expelled or put on probation, and the right to appeal those decisions. Good luck on this one.
- The right to advocate for reform. However, you may be subject to Honor Code actions (aka retaliation) if you do while currently enrolled.
- The right to legal representation. Legal Shield is a low cost option suggested.
I’ve shared before my concern that Honor Code complaints can be a form of sexual harassment due to the culture of sexual repression and the stringent modesty guidelines for women, creating a hostile environment for female students in which they may be unfairly targeted by men whose attentions they find unwelcome. What does that look like? A whole lot like Mr. Collins from Pride & Prejudice but with the backing of an Honor Code Office when he is spurned. [3]
When a complaint is made, the onus is on the accused to prove their innocence and the anonymity of the informant is always maintained wherever possible. Why is this so? The underlying assumption is that anyone who is accused must be guilty of something, and that a complainant is acting in good faith. But why assume this? On the contrary, knowing that an Honor Code investigation is a weapon at every person’s disposal and has no consequences for the accuser, why wouldn’t it be used as retaliation against others? Obviously, this kind of abuse is ready made.
In stating that a main motive behind opening an honor code investigation for any Title IX complaint is avoiding false rape accusations, the Honor Code office mistook victims for informants. This is particularly galling since victims are claiming to be harmed whereas informants are generally identifying someone they claim is harmful to the community, often in a theoretical way with no actual victims. Assuming that victims should be accused to curb complaints while protecting the anonymity of informants (who have not been harmed) is bad policy indeed.
It seems ironic that in a church that decries gossip, we sure do love to encourage and reward being a tattle tale. What is going on in our culture? To understand the issues associated with informants, I did a little looking into the ethical issues that police must evaluate when pursuing an investigation based on informant testimony. Why does someone choose to inform on another person? There are a variety of motivations that can be at play and that could compromise the testimony given:
- Self-interest. By far, self-interest has the most varieties and causes a lot of consternation to determine whether the information is credible. In the case of law enforcement, self-interest might include things the justice system can give the person such as a financial reward, being released from custody for their own crime, reducing their sentence, withdrawn or dismissed charges or being moved to a better incarceration facility. But there are more personal self-interests that can be a motive: eliminating rivals, diverting attention from one’s own criminal activity, and revenge or retaliation. A person may simply like the positive attention that comes with being an informant; they are listened to.
- Self-preservation. A person may inform on another person if they wish to be protected from an individual who has threatened them or they fear may harm them. A person may inform to receive protection.
- Conscience. A person may have a desire to work on the side of “right” due to a guilty conscience or otherwise may have a genuine desire to assist in enforcement of the law.
Knowing that these motives can cause the information presented to be unreliable, what do law enforcement officers do to prevent using bad intelligence? One site gives several valuable guidelines to avoid ethical issues when working with informants. Taking those guidelines and applying them to an Honor Code context or even a local leader receiving “complaints” from ward members, these seem like appropriate cautions that should be consistently applied:
- Remain neutral. Don’t immediately side with the informant. Once you begin to construct a theory, your ability to incorporate facts that disagree with your theory is reduced. What is your own motive in relation to this information? Does it trigger any fears or hopes or assumptions in you? Can you set those aside to be impartial?
- Evaluate informant motivation. People rarely come forward without a self-interested motive. Their motive colors their interpretation of the “facts.” They are selling you a theory, but this is a buyer’s market. Take your time.
- Corroborate information. Don’t address issues that originate solely from an individual complaint where no tangible harm has occurred. Be very cautious about addressing any complaint where no tangible harm has occurred, regardless of the corroboration.
- Don’t reward tattling. Rewards may take many forms and may include simply listening to gossip or agreeing with someone. Busybodies eat that stuff up with a spoon. If harm is involved, empathizing is appropriate, without assuming the information is correct.
- Don’t commit to outcomes. If you make a promise without gathering corroboration or talking (while remaining neutral) to the accused person, you’ve already compromised your ability to judge accurately.
Lastly, it’s important to remember that tattling always has a motive:
Only rarely are confidential informants upstanding citizens who desire to assist law enforcement for the good of society.
We’ve discussed some of the excesses at BYU, an environment in which young people are more restricted and live within a more structured set of rules than we do as adults. However, this “tattle-tale” culture exists within many of our local congregations also. It is common for people to report having been released from callings or accused by anonymous ward members of unorthodox beliefs or other “victimless” actions. Missionaries are also encouraged to ensure their fellow missionaries follow the rules. Given that many church members attended BYU or served missions, it’s not surprising that these policing and informing behaviors flourish in church culture at large. Without checks and balances, though, leader roulette is an ever-present threat.
Now, a few discussion questions:
- Does the church have a “tattle-friendly” culture or is it roughly the same as all groups of people? Are younger groups of Mormons more likely to tattle than adults?
- What would you report a fellow church member for?
- Only for something that harms another person (e.g. adultery, fraud, domestic abuse) or also for things that are more theoretical harm (e.g. teaching false doctrine, disagreeing with the brethren on Facebook) or for things that are individual agency related (e.g. not having a testimony, drinking coffee or alcohol)?
- Would you report someone if you had strong suspicions or only if you had certain knowledge?
- Would you first confront that person or not? Does it depend on the offense?
- Has anyone ever tattled on you for something? What was the issue? What happened?
- Have you ever tattled on someone else? What happened?
Discuss.
[1] The Free BYU Movement petitions church-owned schools to allow students who have either lost their belief in the church or those who have converted to another faith from Mormonism while attending BYU to be eligible to remain at the school in good standing provided they continue to follow the Honor Code guidelines. Currently, students who do not receive an ecclesiastical endorsement requiring a profession of belief are subject to expulsion. This encourages students who have lost their faith to lie in order to obtain the required endorsement rather than to lose some of their educational investment in a forced transfer. While BYU does not object to a student converting to Mormonism while enrolled there, any profession of disbelief by a baptized member can result in a lost endorsement and expulsion. Thus far, the FreeBYU Movement has been unsuccessful at challenging the school’s accreditation on these grounds.
[2] The ATHCOE project seeks to create Honor Code transparency and accountability.
[3] In the novel, Mr. Collins appeals to Mrs. Bennett to support him, which she readily agrees to do since she doesn’t care much for the happiness of her least favorite daughter, but Mr. Bennett who more rightly judges Mr. Collins’ character and behavior quickly sees through the man and supports his daughter.
Wheat & Tares 
I’m not fond of the ” The Free BYU Movement ” which aggressively attacks the graduates of BYU and the Church from time to time as well as its primary mission. That annoys me.
Interesting. I turned some people over to the Church audit committee for promulgating false doctrine as “First Presidency Statements.” Just a regional 70, stake president and bishop. They were motivated to repent.
I’d probably turn in someone who was actively harming others (especially in cases with mandatory reporting). Before mandatory reporting I turned someone in by paying for their child to receive counseling. That resulted in the abuse being uncovered.
Not sure what else is worth the effort. For the most part, tattling is annoying, not useful. But I’d stop the sexual abuse of a child again in a heartbeat.
It seems the honor code office acted honorably in the one and only case cited in the original posting, thus suggesting the lie in the original posting’s charge that “When a complaint is made, the onus is on the accused to prove their innocence…”?
“it came to light that not only was BYU opening an honor code investigation on all who reported that they were raped”
That’s been conclusively established? How do you know this? Just from the Trib’s sample group?
Also, you cast aspersions on BYU’s process of listening to informants. Are individuals immediately assumed guilty and burdened to prove their innocence? You know this how? Your anecdote from Brad Levin?
Why would you complain about a lack of transparency when you’re so positive you can see through it anyway? Since the rest of us can’t, it allows you to tell us what’s really happening, doesn’t it?
I was tattled on to the bishop of a student ward (not BYU) for looming at the internet for information about the church. This was almost 20 years ago. I was also tattled on for suggesting a book for a RS book club that was sold at Deseret book and subsequently publicly chastised by the bishop’s wife who said I liked to sin. Good times.
hawkgrrrl – I am going to tell on you for your tone in this post! he he he 🙂
As this Deseret News article reports, Elizabeth Smart recently interviewed 2 rape survivors who were investigated and cleared by the Honor Code Office when they were at BYU. If they were not found in violation of the Honor Code, why were they investigated in the first place? (http://m.deseretnews.com/article/865655130/Elizabeth-Smart-picks-BYU-rape-response-for-her-first-story-as-a-new-TV-correspondent.html?pg=all)
I know of the SL Tribune previously reporting two cases where girls were investigated by the HCO after reporting the assaults and both were cleared. This is not a one-time deal.
So let’s say I’m a slutty girl who attends BYU and parties with the best of them. I’ve earned a full Honor Code Investigation and expulsion from the university. I still don’t deserve to be raped. No matter what I wear. No matter how drunk I am. No matter how late it is. No means NO.
Amen.
In light of other recent posts, and the general consensus that rape victims should be able to report their rapes without fear that they’d be punished for any honor code violations that lead up to them, some people were worried about false accusations. Most of us felt that wasn’t yet a problem (because false rape accusations are rare), but I pointed out that when the price of reporting rape became low, false reports would increase. That’s essentially the argument you’ve made here about reporting honor code violations – there’s no price to report people, so why not get your least favorite person in trouble? That said, I’m not convinced you have any idea how big a problem it actually is.
Mary Ann, I never claimed it was a one time thing, but to say reporting a rape automatically starts an systemic response which includes an honor code investigation is a different thing. And for all I know, it may be true. But hawkgrrrl doesn’t know either. For some of those girls, other things could have triggered the investigation.
Martin,
Nobody has any idea how big a problem it is unless they actually read the files, and since people can only read their own files, that’s not going to happen. On the link attached, Brad outlines several HCO investigations and their outcomes. Several cases were also outlined in my own linked post on hostile environment.
Although Brad’s movement has a specific objective, and his posts on this topic are making the rounds this weekend and inspired my own thoughts here, my post is not really a promotion of his movement, whether it’s a worthwhile effort or not. I think this movement is better than FreeBYU, but that’s just my opinion. Having been a BYU student, I am no fan of the HCO and have never seen it as a positive influence on the campus. All my experiences with it, including friends who were sent there as well as the sole time I was sent there, were silly victimless nonsense that wasted time and caused stress. I was sent there for a skirt the HCO deemed long enough but still told not to wear it again and told that my false accuser would have no repercussions for the impacts I had from the accusation. And that was for a piffle.
I wanted to talk about what elements in our culture promote tattling, whether it’s a normal amount of tattling or not, what incentives there are, and how leaders should best handle tattling when it occurs. That’s why my discussion questions at the end are about those things.
I knew of many minor honor code violations during my time at the Y and suspected some major ones. In no cases did I tattle on anyone and I am not aware of anyone else who did so either. The reason for this situation, which I am sure is the majority attitude among the student body is in the title. “Honor” code implies personal honor. You will police yourself with honor. Everyone else around you is expected to do the same.
As Stephen Marsh says, turning someone in for harming others, especially those who cannot protect themselves, is definitely a situation for action. I would probably counsel privately with individual members who are preaching false doctrine up to the bishop of the ward. For the higher leaders, I think that Stephen’s approach is best, because there would be no easy recourse if you privately counsel a 70 or stake president and they take exception.
I was tattled on to the bishop a few years back for not paying tithing. I was donating stock directly to church headquarters, so there was no local record. (I am pretty sure that the bishop checked the local records before taking any more steps) I was kind of surprised that the bishop did not know about this, since he was a fairly high manager at a publicly traded company, and our ward had many people who got some stock compensation in it.
If he did know about donating stock, that implies that the tattler was very close to me. I hope that was not the case.
I was called into the bishop’s office because I quoted a scripture from the NLT bible, rather than the KJV bible in order to understand an obscure verse from Isaiah in Gospel Doctrine class. I was told to only use KJV even if people couldn’t understand the KJV.
Hawk, I understand, but your fairly significant intro also presented allegations as established fact. That falls somewhere between spin and misrepresentation.
“I wanted to talk about what elements in our culture promote tattling…”
I’m game.
If I had to ascribe tattling to an element of LDS culture, I would have to say it is the culture of purity. Be it “pure doctrine”, sexual purity, pure thoughts, “white as wool”, or whatever. Jesus does teach the importance of personal purity, but I think this is often extrapolated by many members to include institutional purity.
We teach that the apostasy happened because the gospel became corrupted. We often define ourselves as the salt of the Earth, and along with it the notion that if the salt becomes impure it will be tossed out. Top leadership is busy excommunicating those that don’t toe the line of the current version of “pure doctrine”. So it makes logical sense for the lay membership to follow the examples and teachings of leadership.
Tattlers at BYU are trying to keep BYU pure. Honor code breakers are viewed as corrupting the purity of the institution. M was probably tattled on for promoting what was perceived as impure doctrines. MH was tattled on for quoting impure scripture.
In a culture where no unclean thing can enter the kingdom of heaven and children are encouraged to make exclusive “never even once” clubs, the culture of purity will thrive. After all, ’tis better to pluck out an eye than let it offend thee, especially when that eye is someone else’s.
JLM: Johnathan Haidt would agree with your assessment about purity most likely, but he would also say that purity is mostly a conservative concern. Given how conservative the church is then, perhaps tattling (to avoid impurities) is more common rather than less common in the church than in society at large. Along with a need for institutional purity, Haidt points out that there is more deference for authority in conservative political views, hence tattling to an authority figure is preferred to going to the person directly maybe.
Martin, the “facts” you are calling spin were addressed in my earlier post on BYU Rape Myths. Since they aren’t the point of this post, just evidence of tattle tale culture, I didn’t link them again. These facts are: 1) BYU has to now opened an HCO investigation on all rape victims it knows about even when no code violation was involved in the case, 2) those students and others weren’t aware they had a file, and 3) students can request a copy of their file. I further stated that it’s the onus on the accused student rather than the accuser to prove innocence, rather than an assumption of innocence. I should caveat that when the case is never brought to the student, the student doesn’t have to exonerate her/himself, but every complaint that has been referenced (there are about a dozen on the linked site for ATHCOE and 5 others in my linked post on hostile environment) was taken seriously by the HCO and the person investigated for code violations or ideological impurity (depending on the accusation). This is for random anonymous complaints as vague as having “homosexual ideas.” I hope that clarifies. You can disagree with me that it’s a culture of mistrusting someone who is accused. That’s my honest assessment based on personal experience, and these cases are consistent.
My belief that false accusations are not investigated is because that’s what I was told when I asked about it when I was falsely accused of wearing a skirt out of dress code as a freshman at BYU. Instead I was told the skirt was fine, but don’t wear it again just in case. As the accused, the HCO felt the onus was entirely on me to prevent future false claims. I asked what consequences the accuser would have, and they said none.
I never went to BYU, but my best friend did. Her freshman year she had a roommate who often had men over to the apartment for sex (I’m unsure if it was the same man repeatedly or different men). My friend had to decide if she wanted to report her roommate to the honor code office. She mostly felt like it was none of her business, but other students told her that if she knew about a violation and didn’t report it she could also be punished. I think before she could come to a decision, the roommate voluntarily left BYU. I was at the University of Utah at the time. I also had a roommate who had a boyfriend who was constantly staying the night at the house. I thought it was very weird that my friend felt like if she didn’t tattle on her roommate she could possibly be suspended. That was the first of many instances that made me glad I decided to go to the University of Utah instead of BYU.
Martin – “Are individuals immediately assumed guilty and burdened to prove their innocence? You know this how?”
When I was a BYU student, I had a complaint made about me to the Honor Code office. The complaint was filed by another student who was fighting his own Honor Code investigation. He had been accused of viewing pornography on BYU machines connected to the internet (because he tripped the anti-porn filters). He had, in fact, been downloading mp3 files from various websites, some of which tripped BYU filters. These were the days before knowledge of mp3s was widespread and there weren’t any BYU rules about it. (BYU was actually a hotbed for mp3 trading back in those days.)
The student who filed the complaint against me had done so to throw me under the bus, hoping it would cause him to beat the charges against himself. And – like him – I had also been downloading mp3 files. Unlike him, I came clean and described what we were doing. I beat the rap, but he was thrown out. Still – I was considered guilty until I was able to prove myself innocent. He was considered guilty even after I gave a reasonable explanation for why he tripped porn filters, most likely because he also tried to throw me under the bus.
hawkgrrrl – Wow… you had to go to the HCO for a skirt that was long enough but still told not to wear it again?! That’s some Taliban-level stuff right there! At least I UNDERSTAND why I got sent to the HCO (suspicion of pr0n) but yours is beyond ludicrous. But a skirt? Seriously? Don’t these people have anything better to do?
One last comment… if hawkgrrl would not have gone to the HCO to talk to them about her skirt, they would have suspended her registration and effectively kicked her out of BYU. Same with me and the false accusation of using another student’s account to view “adult websites”. We were REQUIRED to go to the HCO and answer for ourselves, regardless of how ridiculous the complaint. When an HCO complaint is filed, it automatically starts with the assumption of guilt until innocence is proven by their standards. Hawkgrrl is not exaggerating.
Great talk from President Dieter F. Uchtdorf.
“Don’t judge me because I sin differently than you.”
https://www.lds.org/general-conference/2012/04/the-merciful-obtain-mercy?lang=eng&_r=1
I’m getting the impression Martin hasn’t read the cases in the linked site. Here are the examples:
1 – I criticized the BYU spokesperson on Facebook. A former friend who I had a dispute with sent a screenshot to the HCO. They said I couldn’t graduate unless I met with them. I had to meet with Casey Peterson four times, and even after graduating and moving out of Utah, I had to submit time-stamped photos showing I was clean-shaven for two months after graduation, read scriptures, write in my journal, and submit an essay about the importance of respect.
2 – I reported being raped to the Title IX office in January 2015. Then in February, I accessed my file and saw they had over 20 pages of details about my rape report, my conversations with the HCO receptionist, and comments about my attitude from my interview with them.
3 – I was raped and pregnancy resulted. My bishop didn’t believe me, and as a result I was expelled.
4 – I viewed pornography and reported that fact to the HCO. The HCO threatened me that if I didn’t sign a waiver of my priest/penitent legal privilege, they would suspend me from the school. In other words, I had to totally waive my legal privacy rights to enjoy confidential discussions with my bishop. Those discussions were no longer privileged. They also gave me a letter, that I had to sign, explaining that I was “a danger to myself and others.” I had to disclose this probation on grad school applications and a professional licensing application years later.
5 – I confessed a sin to the bishop, who told me I’d have to the tell the HCO, which I did. They told me I couldn’t finish my degree as a consequence, and my mom kicked me out of the house. I wrote a letter to the HCO pleading my case, and they said I could stay but would only get my degree 8 months after graduating. I had to: write in my journal every day (which I had to allow them to read), take notes on EVERY byu devotional from July 2014-July 2015 (this by far took the longest!), complete an assignment where I find scriptures on a dozen different topics (chastity, modesty, charity) and relate them back to my life , I could walk in graduation but they wouldn’t put my name in the program, meeting with an honor code counselor monthly and discussing different talks, attending therapy every week, Complete 50 hours of volunteer work, Attend church and pay tithing (they checked with my bishop every month to make sure), Write a 6 page paper on the whole experience.
6 – While at BYU-I, I drank coffee to counter the effects of my anti-depressant meds. My neighbor reported me to the Bishop, who withdrew my ecclesiastical endorsement- resulting in my suspension.
Those are just some of the cases in the link. I also had a roommate who was turned in because she was late to do a BYU news broadcast and parked in a non-student space. When she paid the ticket, she wrote “bulls**t ticket” in the memo line. She had to pay the fine and personally apologize to the clerk who processes fines for exposing her to profanity to lift the sanction on her school records. Nearly all of my roommates were sent in for minor violations at one time or another, usually dress code related, nearly always for something that wasn’t actually deemed inappropriate. The informant’s identity is always kept secret, and no consequences apply to the informant for specious claims.
I’m with JLM. The notion of “maintaining purity” is similar to the “defending the faith” idea that, once internalized, permitted thousands of Christian nights to slaughter thousands of Saracens during the Crusades without feeling at all morally conflicted. Same thing (obviously on a different scale) at BYU: folks turning in roommates, the protecting of informants, and generally a kind of absurd boundary maintenance infused with the zealous paranoia one would expect from BYU. It’s not that surprising, really, since a lot of Mormon culture seems, in direct opposition to the teachings of Christ, much more concerned with the letter of the law rather than with the spirit of the law. Try reading some of the stuff that went on at BYU during the Wilkinson years. I have an older friend, conservative as they come, who attended BYU during the whole “student spy ring” years and he tells a number of stories about the extraordinary lengths both the administration and the students went to in order to ferret out anyone who wasn’t living absolutely by the book. Truly bizarre.
I get that belonging to any community demands at least some kind of buy-in regarding social codes, behavioral expectations or some kind of core belief, but what’s going on at BYU just seems madness. I think it’s a startlingly negative example of what happens when we become so focused on being “perfectly obedient” that we forget our humanity. Sadly, it’s both our leaders and the members who are responsible for this.
That’s “knights”. Stupid spell check.
I don’t know if it adds anything, but I am reminded of the video BYU-I put out a few years ago where Pres. Clark describes not reporting a fellow student for porn/masturbation issues was equivalent to abandoning a wounded soldier on the battlefield. how do these kind of “rescue sinners” rhetoric figure into this tattle tale culture?
Following a link from a Des News article from the incident, I ended up here (http://www.byui.edu/housing/student-living/am-i-my-brothers-keeper ) which talks about how we should care about our brothers and sisters dealing with sin:
“The man by the road represents so many of our brothers and sisters, so many of us wounded by the perils of mortal life and the battles of the Great War. And yet, in our modern society, the Enemy has spread fear of getting involved when someone is in trouble and has fostered a social stigma that attaches to people who speak up in the face of evil. The Enemy whispers, ‘Don’t get involved; it’s not your problem. Don’t tell; you will be a tattletale.'” — Pres. Kim Clark BYU-I devotional Jan 15 2008.
I see one contrast between the OP and what I see from Pres. Clark. Pres. Clark describes tattling as being rooted in a desire for the welfare of the accused. The OP states that this rarely if ever the motivation behind actual cases of tattling. Does this change anything in the discussion?
MrShorty,
Yes, I thought of that video as well. I guess it all depends on how you look at it. Is “tattling” truly a kind of morally obligated, spiritual rescue? Or is it arrogant presumption? I don’t think that most honor code violations, even p0rn usage, are evil. It’s certainly not evil for men to wear long hair or for women to wear short skirts. I’m a little leery of the whole “war on evil” rhetoric. Sounds more like a kind of rabid fundamentalism than anything really born out of genuine compassion and concern for others. YMMV.
hawkgrrrl, both this “The HCO threatened me that if I didn’t sign a waiver of my priest/penitent legal privilege, they would suspend me from the school. In other words, I had to totally waive my legal privacy rights to enjoy confidential discussions with my bishop. Those discussions were no longer privileged. They also gave me a letter, that I had to sign, explaining that I was “a danger to myself and others.” I had to disclose this probation on grad school applications and a professional licensing application years later.”
and your skirt experience leave me appalled. What kind of madness is this?!!
“BYU has to now opened an HCO investigation on all rape victims it knows about even when no code violation was involved in the case”
Hawk, I’m going to drop it after this, but just because every reported rape you know about has an HCO file associated with it is not sufficient evidence to establish your statement. You have no idea how many other rapes have reported for which they’re aren’t HCO investigations. You also don’t know what BYU’s systemic response to a rape allegation is because they won’t tell us, so complain about that rather than pretend you do.
Likewise, some of your evidence isn’t evidence of any of your claims, just information to make people angry, eg.
“While at BYU-I, I drank coffee to counter the effects of my anti-depressant meds. My neighbor reported me to the Bishop, who withdrew my ecclesiastical endorsement- resulting in my suspension”
Is this evidence of guilty until proven innocent? What exactly is this evidence of, other than you don’t think the HCO or the honor code or whatever is a good thing? That’s fine. My point is that you can make a solid case against the HCO or the Honor Code without presenting allegations as fact. Grind your ax, but stay away from slander. It’s not cool.
Lastly, the fact that you’re required to respond to allegations made by anonymous accusers to the HCO is not a presumption of guilt. You were a corporate exec — how did HR respond to allegations? They ask questions, right? What would you do if your employee refused to respond to questions? Your issue isn’t how BYU responds to allegations, your complaint is which allegations they respond to, like your skirt length. It’s not a presumption of guilt you’re worried about so much as that they get in your face over stupid stuff. Those are two different issues.
You’re probably mad at me for sidetracking your post, but I think you sidetracked it yourself with your intro. Anyway, I’m done picking at you.
“The HCO threatened me that if I didn’t sign a waiver of my priest/penitent legal privilege, they would suspend me from the school. In other words, I had to totally waive my legal privacy rights to enjoy confidential discussions with my bishop.”
?!
The implications as to any institutional claim of priest/penitent privilege are dramatic.
Did they really mean to commit the Church to the position that the Church has the power to insist on a waiver?
Martin: Slander is verbal; libel is written. However, in either case, I’m just presenting the information that is out there; it’s what those who were investigated state happened, so take it from that perspective. Clearly it’s not possible to know all the cases that aren’t represented, and it’s not possible to know if their reporting of the incident is accurate. I have heard (personally) dozens of cases of people being sent to the HCO, and they are all consistent with the picture being painted here. That’s the basis for my conclusion.
However, one additional thing you mentioned requires clarification. The news articles with the non-HC related rape cases in which an honor code investigation was opened is the source of the claim that the honor code opens a case for all rape accusations; one of the students was told this when she asked why the investigation on her was opened. That combined with the fact that the coding system for both HCO and Title IX is identical, and the two shared an office until this scandal broke, all combine to illustrate the level of cooperation between these two entities.
Lastly, it ain’t libel if it’s true.
Martin: As to your question about presumption of guilt or ticky tack rule policing, I would say it’s both. The accused is always put on the defensive (in my experience) when the Honor Code office is involved. Thankfully, that is not usually the case in corporate America and not usually the case in most wards. It seems that wards are more “common sense” applies when it comes to tattling. Most tattling falls away like the gossip that it is. Serious allegations may be addressed, but beyond that, I’m sure most of it is ignored.
MrShorty: “Clark describes tattling as being rooted in a desire for the welfare of the accused. The OP states that this rarely if ever the motivation behind actual cases of tattling. Does this change anything in the discussion?” That Pres. Clark believes that is telling. The site I referenced about ethics of informants is a site for police departments who use informants in investigations. That’s where it was pointed out that informants very seldom inform just to be an upstanding citizen. There are nearly always additional motives at play, so law enforcement officers are wise to be on their guard and skeptical of information they receive from these sources.
“which I am sure is the majority attitude among the student body is in the title. “Honor” code implies personal honor. You will police yourself with honor. Everyone else around you is expected to do the same.”
That’s the traditional notion of honor codes. It seems almost quaint when applied to BYU. The BYU version is a little more, uh, idiosyncratic-to be kind to BYU. If only the “Brethren” and BYU admins would trust the kids they accept to the school enough to give them freedom to act honorably.
This comment thread is a little scary. I seriously hope none of my kids decide to go to a church school.
The Honor Code Office seems a bit out of control. It looks like they are now undergoing a state investigation? The whole thing is a bit strange.
Gougs,
Yes, a tattle-tale culture and a campus wide Honor Code do not mix well. When you have 80-90% of the student body on the Honor side, you still have several thousand on the “collective honor” or even the dishonor side. An honor code investigation when one is acting honorably is an annoyance, like hawkgrrrl describes, but no more than that. Also, in my experience from long ago, the admin & profs were generally quite trusting of the students. More problems were likely to be coming from a few hypersensitive students from the second hand accounts I heard.
Hopefully there are a few college campuses that can keep the honor system going strong. Safe spaces where SJWs can complain about any strong opinion they dislike are far away from honor (and safety) also. Other than undermining core LDS teachings, there seems to be pretty wide latitude for discussion and learning. I have seen alternate bible translations and plenty of non-correlated biblical scholarship discussed by BYU profs on-line.
If I make a title IX complaint they will open an investigation on me. Is this any complaint or just if I complain about being raped?
If I make an honor code complaint they will sheild me from investigation.
Is that correct?
I want to be clear on the facts and the system before I comment further.
Thanks to anyone who can confirm.
I’m just trying to make sure I understand.
Stephen: The latest news on the issues with Title IX and honor code investigations is only getting worse. “The Salt Lake Tribune has obtained BYU documents that show that a BYU police lieutenant accessed a countywide database of police records to collect information from another department for an Honor Code investigation in at least one case.” http://www.sltrib.com/news/3956084-155/state-investigating-how-byu-police-access
To answer your questions, according to what students reported they were told, yes, making a Title IX complaint that you were sexually assaulted automatically resulted in an HCO investigation on you (the victim). This is hearsay reported in several different news outlets.
If you make an HCO complaint about another student, your identity will be redacted in any documents regarding your complaint, and the HCO will not share your identity with the person you accuse, although accusers are cautioned that the person they accuse may deduce who accused them. I was personally told that a false allegation carried no consequences, but I assume they were referring to my own case only, not necessarily all HCO investigations. Having said that, I know of many cases where fellow students were called in for ticky tack “violations” that turned out to be specious (or so they were told), and they likewise were told there were no consequences for false accusations–in their cases.
Accurate allegations for serious offenses like rape are discouraged. False allegations for stupid crap are encouraged. That’s one way to look at it anyway.
I think the BYU tattle culture arises from perceptions of fairness and justice. I never went there, but I don’t think it’s a stretch for a reasonable, obedient BYU student to feel frustrated by the depth and volume of restrictions that come from the Honor Code, and to be even more frustrated by students who flagrantly and knowingly violate it, especially for petty offenses like clothing choices or not shaving. A typical thought pattern might go something like this: “As a cost of attending this fine university, I agreed to follow the rules, however arcane they may be. I experience a lot of personal inconvenience to stay in compliance with these rules, so it is completely unfair that some students circumvent these rules for the sake of convenience, but enjoy the same privileges. Thus, it is my duty to report such violators.” The attitude becomes cemented into the culture by the religious context, with all the preaching about honor, obedience, eternal consequences, etc.
I encountered this attitude a lot in the military too, especially in the junior enlisted ranks–the idea that “I’m miserable, so everyone else needs to be miserable too, or else it’s not fair”. Perhaps it is just a manifestation of teenage/young adult immaturity, whining about life being unfair, but being empowered enough to think they can actually do something about it.
hawk — that is disturbing.
It makes it appear that any Title IX complaint results in institutional retaliation, while Title IX violations (specious sexual harassment via reporting) is immunized.
I’m trying to make sure I have that right, that the entire honor code office is set up as a Title IX violation support system?
I need to follow-up to confirm details.
I have a feeling that Martin has the same thinking errors and logical fallacies that have perpetuated this fiasco. Just last week I spoke with a BYU boy who told me that “they (rape victims) need punishment because they broke the rules”.
I’ve never tattled and the older I get, and the more I understand the doctrine of Christ, the less I believe it is a worthy thing to do.
I’m curious if any of the Groper incidents triggered HCO investigations, or if any information was shared between the campus police and the Title IX office.
Is the “Project ATHCOE” (that hawkgrrrl links to in the OP) a site that is periodically updating and adding ludicrous stories as they come in? Is there a clearinghouse for stories that isn’t associated with a clearly “ex” and antagonistic group?
This is so troubling. Embarrassing. And I’m going to say it: the reason I can’t scold my husband for calling it “Satan’s Plan University.” It’s evil.
“I’m trying to make sure I have that right, that the entire honor code office is set up as a Title IX violation support system?” Stephen, I think that’s a chicken and egg question. I believe the HCO came before Title IX. Also, in light of the committee that’s been formed, there are not only changes coming but a few that happened very quickly–one was moving the HCO office down the hall so they no longer share a suite with the Title IX office.
Given the preference for Jedi Mind Tricks when caught with their hand in the cookie jar, I wouldn’t expect the institution to take a lot of accountability or apologize or be transparent or anything.
If someone rattled on me to the bishop I would tell him to tell that person to look up the Kacey Musgraves “Biscuits”. It’s the best response to adult tattle telling I’ve ever heard. “Taking down your neighbor won’t take you any higher… Just hoe your own row and raise your own babies, smoke your own smokes and grow your own daisies, mend you own fences and own your own crazy, mind you own biscuits and life will be gravy…the holiest of Holys even slip from time to time…Pouring salt in my sugar won’t make yours any sweeter. Pissing in my yard ain’t gonna make yours any greener and I wouldn’t know about the rocks in your shoes, so I’ll just do me and honey you can just do you.” I might also suggest they look up her songs “step off” and “the trailer song” and if I’m feeling especially saucy “follow your arrow.” Kacey Musgraves songs are the answer to all busybody problems.
“Given the preference for Jedi Mind Tricks…”
These are not the rapists you are looking for. Move along. Move along.
“Other than undermining core LDS teachings”. Would you include the heavy handed even coercive way the “Honor Code” is enforced as consistent with the core LDS view of (free) agency?
If your ratios are correct, and I suspect they are, do you have any guesses why the Brethren and BYU admins are so insecure about the BYU kids? if they are so honorable and mature then why does the honor code touch on so many petty and silly aspects of adult life? Beards? Sandals? Shorts? Let them behave with the honor the admins dishonestly claim they believe the kids have w/o a sword of Damocles hanging over them. I think the vast majority of BYU kids can handle the responsibility of behaving properly. Why don’t the admins and Brethren? They must know something we don’t about those darn Mormon kids at BYU. What they don’t know, their honor code enabled snitches will tell them.
Full disclosure: We are a Big10, PAC12 and Patriot league family anyway. No need to slum at BYU. lol. But my kids are taught by BYU grads at church and rub shoulders with kids who attend. My kids are equal parts amused and kind of concerned when they bump into the more zealous BYU people who praise the Honor Code and its corrosive effects throughout the Church. Those types perform a very valuable service to me and my wife by scaring off my kids so I don’t have to actually tell them how disappointed we would be if they wanted to attend. If one of my kids expressed a desire to attend I would have to behave like BYU and take away their free agency! I would take the hypocrisy bullet for my kids.
Most kids I know who go to BYU are pretty decent and easily capable of good manners and figuring out how to dress modestly without the current honor code. It’s a mystery to me why the Brethren and BYU admins think so little of the students that are accepted there.
Stephen Marsh, you say that FreeBYU “aggressively attacks the graduates of BYU and the Church from time to time as well as its primary mission”. I’ve been involved to some extent or another in nearly everything the group has said or done since it began and I’m completely at a loss for what you’re referring to. We’ve always gone out of our way to make sure that our message and actions don’t attack or even criticize the church itself. We’ve even had believing members help us, at our request, to help moderate the comments under our Facebook posts to keep them respectful and prevent any mistaken perceptions that this is an “anti-Mormon” group or movement. Our issue is with certain harmful Honor Code policies that are at odds with the church’s position that “freedom of religion is a fundamental human right that protects the conscience of all people”. We certainly don’t need to attack the church to make that case.
Especially puzzling to me is your claim that we attack the graduates of BYU, a demographic that most of us, myself included, fall into. I’m not even sure what you’re trying to say there.
If you stand by these accusations, would you please provide specific examples – at least one for each of the three groups/things you say we attack?
The church should get the colleges over to the state. It’s not worth all the fuss.
Just glad I stayed in Utah for a few months and did not take the tenured lecturing position I was offered at BYU. I have had a wonderful academic life since then.
Look there is a very expansive and often wonderful world outside Utah and ” the world”…..a great post as usual and this is luckily a US focus ……I am sure you have no idea how this craziness looks in the broader Mormon world
Ryan B — I have had the accreditation of my program attacked by Free BYU which means that should they succeed I run the risk of losing licensure or not being able to obtain it in states other than the one where I am.
In addition, the rhetoric I’ve seen at times has been harsh and has included graduates as deserving of condemnation.
Feel free to claim that doesn’t happen from time to time.
I’ll take your demands and your position as an example of just how much I can trust you.
Stephen, we’ve challenged BYU Law’s accreditation because it’s simply not in compliance with the accreditation standards it’s bound by. The ABA has very explicit non-discrimination policies and, as a result, the school has an entire page on its website devoted to affirming that it does not discriminate on the basis of religion, among other things; yet it discriminates on that very basis. Moreover, it holds and sponsors conferences devoted to the subject of religious freedom; yet its students don’t have that freedom. Is any of this just, sensible, or consistent? If not, are we really the bad guys for pointing that out and trying to change it? Should the ABA and BYU Law really be certifying to the school’s students and prospective students and to the public that it doesn’t discriminate when it in fact does?
If we’re successful in our challenge, BYU will just need to make a simple change or two to its policies. The odds of it actually losing its accreditation are slim to nil, as we’ve always said. There are many other steps that would be taken first, so BYU would basically have to make a conscious decision to relinquish the accreditation of its esteemed law school.
Regarding your assertions about the “rhetoric” of those in the FreeBYU movement, it seems clear to me now that you’re including every statement supportive of the movement regardless of whether it came from someone in the actual FreeBYU organization (a distinction that will probably be lost on most people who read your comments). But a movement consists of doers, not talkers, and those who are taking substantive action for this cause aren’t using the rhetoric you’re referring to. Naturally, any activist movement will have sideline supporters who are extra critical of the movement’s target for a variety of reasons, so this isn’t a legitimate critique of the movement itself.