Dealing With Date Rape

"IWAS EMBARRASSED and a little drunk but I told him, no, no I didn't want to have sex but he did it anyway, he just didn't hear me. Now I feel ashamed and dirty--what can I do?"

A little over a year ago, students called for the University to reexamine its ability to hear stories like this one. Without a definite disciplinary procedure, education for administrators or even a policy about rape, how could the College adequately respond to the pervasive problem of sexual violence on this campus? The Date Rape Task Force report, produced by a group of administrators, students and faculty working with other members of this community, attempts to address the critical dilemma of our society's and our institution's resistance to hearing the stories of women and men affected by rape.

To avoid perpetuating and repeating the violation caused when one person refuses to hear another person's "no," it is necessary that institutions and individuals hear all the multiple and often conflicting stories produced by sexual assault. I hope and request that the release of the report provide an opportunity for each of us to hear the complexities involved with rape. By taking the time to think about our own responses, opinions, and fears about rape, we will make the problem more audible, less hidden and therefore more preventable.

T TASK FORCE has recommended a series of significant changes intended both to reduce the incidence of rape and to improve the College's hearing process pertaining to sexual misconduct. Three of the key elements of the report are as follows:

1. The report includes a policy that clearly defines rape, sexual assault and sexual misconduct as anathema to the Harvard and Radcliffe community. The policy forcefully states the refusal to accept these behaviors and the commitment to work to eliminate and address this problem both internally and in conjunction with the criminal justice system.

Before drafting this policy, the College's position regarding rapes was only a matter of speculation. This vagueness allowed for assumptions by survivors, friends and potential perpetrators that sexual misconduct was not taken as a serious offense. Having a policy is only a first step--but a vital one in all educational and preventative processes.

2. Procedural recommendations have been made in order to assure all individuals a fair hearing in sexual misconduct cases. Changes include the concurrent writing of statements about an incident, the definition of the roles of senior advisors and senior tutors in order to avoid conflict of interest and a method of cooperation with the legal system in order both to avoid decriminalizing through concealment serious offenses and to insure the right of the accused in a trial. Codifying procedure provides a solid foundation for disciplinary response to sexual misconduct cases.

3. The most controversial and perhaps most important change recommended is the inclusion of students in hearing peer dispute cases. In order for students to have confidence in a system, which affects our environment, we must be able to participate. The current silent gap between the Administrative Board and students only breeds more silence. This is starkly evidenced by the severe underreporting of sexual assault cases. At this point it is crucial that other members of the student body voice their support for this major revision in Harvard's operating procedure.

Students should also be aware that the coherence and organization of the report masks the complexity and debate that characterized the entire Task Force process. A diverse group of people argued over serious questions such as: What should the College do if charges are pressed in court and an internal hearing could bias the legal process? How does one "encourage" a survivor to speak to the District Attorney's office if she is extremely reluctant to think of her experience as a criminal offense? How can a "fact-finding" committee handle a case where a survivor only remembers fragments of an evening due to excessive drinking?

I hope that the intense conversation between concerned individuals provides a model for members of this community as we attempt to address these issues thoughtfully.

ONCE WE HAVE dealt with the disturbing issues raised by rape that resonate through the Task Force report, then it is crucial to look beyond this single report. There still remain many issues pertaining to the disciplinary and administrative processes that must be addressed.

While I believe that we must be extremely cautious of making the hearing process into a spectacle that may dazzle us so that we can no longer hear the stories of survivors and respondents, I too wonder who is protected by strict rules of confidentiality--is it the students involved or the mystery of the Ad Board that are saved?

This is only one of many problems that plague the process. Others questions might include: Does it make sense to have the same group deciding whether students can drop classes and whether a student has raped another student? What kind of education is required to serve effectively on the Ad Board?

I certainly hope that hearing about rape and the ongoing tensions this violation creates at Harvard will be a beginning place for serious analysis of the age-old assumptions made about institutional structure.

Naomi M. Hamburg '92 was a member of the Date Rape Task Force.