i
MONDAY: Opinion
TUESDAY: Politics
WEDNESDAY: Opinion
THURSDAY: Politics
FRIDAY: Opinion
editorials, letters, commentary and perspective
a
BY MAIL: P.0. Box 3159,
Eugone, OR 97403
BY PHONE: (541)346-5511
BY E-MAIL: ode@oregon.
uoregon. edu
IN PERSON: Suite 300, EMU
Sex policy not equal to assualt problem
■ OUR OPINION: The University’s
proposed student sex code is on the right
road but moving in the wrong direction
t is a rare campus issue that attracts na
tional attention. We all know it doesn’t
take much to stir University debate
-L. when one Christian men’s group using
campus facilities can cause a collective up
roar. But for “Good Morning America” and
CBS News to come calling, the issue needs
to amount to more than campus figure
heads’ meaningless ramblings. It actually
needs to be important.
So when a campus task force revised the
Student Conduct Code so students must re
ceive explicit permission from their part
ner to have sex and then announced the
proposed changes, the reaction was un
derstandably surprising.
News of the proposal, along with the
usual sound bites from directors,
deans and students, appeared
in publications across the f (
country. The fact that a univer- I \/
sitymay be willing to go as far \
in preventing sexual misbehav
ior as Antioch College did in
1991 was important to not just / —jq
one campus but to the whole / / ^
nation. / /
We think the issue is im- \
portant too. Any student who Nv
has had sex, is having sex or is n. '
even thinking about sex would be \
crazy not to think the same. In the pro
posed policy, students would have to
communicate very clearly their request
and/or their permission to their partner
to have sex. It wouldn’t matter who they
were, where they were or what kind of re
lationship they had with our partner. The
permission would need to be communicat
ed verbally, perhaps even on paper.
To call this policy extreme is easy and in
many ways, the label is true. But keep in
mind what the task force was up against
when drafting the policy. On an campus
where 78 survivors of sexual assault sought
help last year at Sexual Assault Support
Services but only ten percent reported it,
the policy almost seems valid — almost.
One of the major changes in the new pol
icy is the specific definitions of “sexual as
sault” and “explicit
consent.” But ironically,
this alteration is also the poli
CHRIS HUTCHINSOWEmerald
or violated in some way
by the suspect. Often, the
cy s primary weakness. They are too broad
and too dangerous.
Currently when sexual assault survivors
report the crime, they open themselves up
to mass confusion and ultimately, a war of
words. The burden of proof is on them.
Survivors must prove they were assaulted
suspect denies the assault. And more often
than not, the survivor feels more vulnera
ble and like a target than during the actual
sexual encounter.
This is why survivors don’t usually re
port the incident. And who could blame
them? The new policy would attempt to
eliminate this gray area, an area where the
truth is so hard to find. But what the task
force failed to realize was the gray area will
still exist, no matter how many restrictions
are placed on sex.
Sexual assault is, by nature, a private
crime and hard to prove physically — es
pecially if actual intercourse did not occur.
No matter how many questions are asked
and precautions taken, ultimately a sexual
crime will come down to one person’s
word versus another’s. The new policy
would simply shift the questions to “Did
Partner A ask before he or she initiated?”
and “Did Partner B give consent before
Partner A initiated?” instead of “Did he or
she rape you?”
Proving or disproving sexual assault will
never be simple. And throwing some for
mal language and regulations into the mix
won’t make the process any easier.
On a wider level, the new policy is glar
ingly impractical; no one will follow it. Sex
is not only inherently private but most of
ten spontaneous. Asking for permission
just doesn’t happen and won’t happen — at
least not in so many words. Even authors of
the new policy admit that believing
its rules will be followed by most of
the student body is close to delusionary.
Fortunately, common sense has pre
vailed somewhere. At small Antioch
College where it all began, they recently
changed their policy to include "non-ver
bal, verbal, physical gestures or other pre
viously agreed upon communication” as
consent. In other words, sexual permission
— as right-minded, ordinary students per
ceive it — was finally included in the poli
cy.
Until changes similar to this one are im
plemented into the new policy, displaying
some level-headedness and respect for the
nature of most sexual encounters, the Uni
versity will be making a mistake.
The world of sexual assault is an ex
tremely terrible and confusing one and can
only be fought by taking equally extreme
measures. Some aspects of it, like prosecu
tion, may never be solved. But by being ex
treme in our solutions, we can’t forget how
to be smart.
This editorial represents the opinion of
the Emerald editorial board.
P 0. BOX 3159. EUGENE. OREGON 97403
The Oregon Daily Emerald is published daily Monday through Fri
day during the school year and Tuesday and Thursday during the sum
mer by the Oregon Daily Emerald Publishing Co. Inc. at the University
of Oregon, Eugene. Oregon A member of the Associated Press, the
Emerald operates independently of the University with offices at Suite
300 of the Erb Memorial Union. The Emerald is private property The
unlawful removal or use of papers is prosecutable by law.
Editor-In-Chief: Steven Asbury
Managing Editor Jennifer Carter Night Editor Steven Asbury
Community: Jennifer Schmitt, editor. Jean Bond, Christian Hill
Entertainment: Nicole Kreuger, editor Jesse Stephenson
Higher Education: Tamyra Howser, m-depth. Laura Cadiz.
Benjamin Kwasney
Opinion: Ashley Bach, editor Chris Hutchinson, illustrator. Brian Di
amond. Larry Haftl, Sonja Sherwood
Politic*: Shana Cohn, editor. Doug Irving
Student Activities: Kristin Bailey, editor Angie Suchy, Tom Potter
Sports: Mark McTyre, editor. Andrea DeYoung, assistant editor
Chris Hansen, Ryan Frank. Ryan Halvorsen
Copy Desk: Thom Schoenborn. copy chief.
Sarah Kickler, Mike Schmierbach. Kendra Smith
Fomentation: Dennis Bolt, editor Matt Garton
Photography: Mathew Stiffler, editor. Andrew Brackensick,
Joe Bunik, Amanda Erickson, Shannon Kilduff, Chad Patteson
Freelance: Lara Pittman, editor On-Line: Nicholas Stiffler
General Manager: Judy Riedl
Advertising Becky Merchant, director Anne Amador. Lee Yen Beh,
7 irco Chmg, Yujin Chi. Matt Johnson, Anne Miller, Trina Shanaman.
Pose Soil. Matt Solomon. Greg Walsh
sssified: T. manager. Natasha Lumpkin. Debbie Levy.
leather Moye
" Ross, manager Ingrid White, coordinator.
'it Daniel, Trevor Kearney,Tara Knight, Melissa
vwta. Allison Stormo, Mike Young
' ne supervisor Judy Connolly
Jeff Johnson, F erenc Rakoczi
.(541)346-5511
.(541)346-3712
.(541)346-5512
.(541)346-4343
LETTERS
No fear
This is concerning Rodney
Schaffer, the “smart and safe”
doctor who wanted to remind
the lone, young and vulnerable
women of the University that
they are not safe (ODE, Oct. 21).
How is it that he can run where
he likes, yet women cannot?
Being a woman, I never “took
back the night” because I never
denied my freedom in the first
place. I stay at work after dark
and make evening runs to the
grocery store or to meet friends
for coffee. My morning runs
and evenings have always been
a time of peace and unwinding
for me. I will not give that up.
Who says it is my own fault
if I am attacked? Do you? Why
then am I to take the blame and
not the attacker? If I lived in
fear the rest of my life, I am still
not guaranteed to be safe. I will
not live in fear because some
one tells me to. Statistically, I
am more likelv to be assaulted
by someone I know, and I have
known women who have expe
rienced this to be true.
Schaffer did not indicate
whether he ran at night or dur
ing the day. Regardless, as his
letter stood, the tone was con
descending and full of blame
and fear on the part of women.
Sita Perez
English
Voting will
Even the Krishnas and pan
handlers have been outdone
this year by the fervor and in
trusiveness of the student voter
registration drive. I would like
to remind the student body that
no one is compelled to talk God
or give change and that register
ing to vote does not compel one
to participate in this election.
If you are unhappy with the
presidential choices selected
for you by faceless party offi
cials, advertising agencies and
their business sponsors, or if
you are apathetic about politics
in a world ruled by money and
bullets, not votes, then reiusing
to vote is a legitimate option.
You may refuse to choose the
lesser evil.
Your duty is not to cast your
ballot as the University’s “Reg
ister & Vote” propaganda
claims, but to do with it as you
see fit. You may write in your
own candidates, “none of the
above,” or any other comments.
Or you may refuse to cast your
ballot at all.
I won’t be wasting my vote
on a system that elects unwant
ed bosses and decides irrele
vant issues, and I reserve the
right to complain. Feel free to
join me.
Jesse Harrington
Journalism
SETA table
Students for the Ethical
Treatment of Animals invite
you to take advantage of a rar e
opportunity taking place on
Oct.30-Nov.l. In the EMU main
lobby, we will table
where we’ll he u ng any
cosmetics and to :• that
were tested on ar' , Tin a
in protest of animat :: ng Tor
vanity, we will send these
products back to . < neamies
along with a petition you can
sign to make a stand against
these cruel tests. We will also
be providing cruelty-free shop
ping guides and other informa
tion.
Animal tests are painful and
extremely inhumane. We want
to call attention to the fact that
there a number of cosmetic and
toiletry companies that don’t
test on animals, which proves
that these acts are undoubtedly
unnecessary. This is a perfect
way to become an educated
and conscientious shopper. So
stop by!
Megan Petersen
Psychology
LETTERS POLICY
The Oregon Daily Emerald will at
j tempt to print all letters containing
, comments on topics of interest to
! the University community.
Letters to the ulitor must be limit
| ed to no more i 250 words, legi
| signed 1 mtification of
ied when the
I letter is sub: ■I.
■ ?s the right to
’ ny letter for length or style.