The Tragedy Of The Sexual Assault Discussion On Campus

Recently Student Life published a front-page article describing a new study by a team of Wash U students about the prevalence of sexual assault at Wash U’s fraternities, specifically as inflicted upon Wash U sorority members. Ignoring that this was not a comprehensive study it completely ignored sexual assault toward non-sorority female students, men or at non-fraternity parties, this article and the study it cites radically distort the reality of sexual assault at this university. This isn’t to say that sexual assault does not occur at Wash U–it does and is beyond dispute. One sexual assault case is one too many, for obvious reasons. This is also not intended to discredit or invalidate the experiences of women at Wash U and elsewhere who have suffered the incalculable trauma and repercussions of sexual violence–it would be insensitive and absurd to do so. Rather, I assert that the notion of a rape culture at Wash U instills undue psychological harm while also discouraging women of our generation from enjoying college parties and college life more broadly.

The intended purpose of my argument is to implement what the architects of the recent study desired, as elucidated in the front-page article of Student Life on the October 29th release. That is, I wish “to create a first step” in a more open discussion of sexual violence in Greek life. My approach to this is to help ensure that the side which is so fervently calling for stricter policies and restrictions does not continue to dominate the discussion on this issue–as such a thing is hardly a discussion at all, but rather a constant, one-sided condemnation. Granted, some ideas from this new side of the discussion may, and likely will, be wholly unreasonable or even dangerous–and therefore those ideas (and not the people)–should be shot down wherever and whenever they arise, just as with any misleading and detrimental notion.

On that note, the article that I describe is from the October 29th release of Student Life called “WPA survey finds widespread sexual violence across fraternities” and includes a graphic showing results from a survey that asked respondents “have you ever experienced unwanted sexual contact from a member of any of the following Greek organizations?”

Now, at first glance this bar graph is both tragic and horrifying. However, this image is grossly misleading: Firstly, there is response bias in this data. As is mentioned in the article, these percentages are based on a sample of 848 Wash U sorority students, not the entirety (or even a representative sample) of the Wash U female student population. More importantly, only 34% of respondents actually answered the question “have you ever experienced unwanted sexual contact from a member of any of the following Greek organizations?” This alone is problematic, as it is almost certain that those who have had unwanted sexual contact are far more likely to answer the written question than those who are not. If you had an opportunity to share your experience anonymously and in an unpressured setting (like that of an anonymous survey), you would be more inclined to share it if it was terrible or traumatic.

Therefore, this study ensures that only a fraction of the surveyed students—and by extension the Wash U sorority population—are represented in this analysis. Combined with the psychological phenomenon of negativity bias, this exaggerates the true proportion of female students who experience “unwanted sexual contact” on campus. Consider the two likely extremes of sexual assault probability at these fraternities: At the high end, these numbers accurately represent the Wash U female population, and the average Wash U fraternity has therefore been the location of unwanted sexual contact for the majority of female Wash U students. At the low end, only the proportion who answered “Yes” out of the 34% who responded to the question of unwanted sexual contact actually experienced it. This would radically reduce the percentage of Wash U sorority members, and by extension female Wash U students, who have dealt with unsolicited sexual contact.

The article states that “most respondents reported at least one instance of unwanted sexual contact.” If this statement was generalized to the entire Wash U female population, then that would imply that most female students experience some form of unwelcome sexual interaction. Unfortunately, the wording of the article seems to conflate “sexual violence” with “unwanted sexual contact” as the writers use the phrases interchangeably. However, even the studies of college women that find the highest recorded rates of sexual assault (i.e. sexual violence) determine that about 1 in 4 female college students experience sexual assault on campus. Even those well-known studies were conducted in such a way that they were also distorted by a response bias which would inflate the numbers from respondents. Nevertheless, this implies that the WPA’s data is skewed toward those who experience unwanted sexual contact, as 1 in 4 is far below 50+%. Again, while unacceptably high, this is far from a majority of female students.

The Student Life article predominantly focused on fleeting instances of sexual contact, such as grinding, kissing, or touching/groping (which could often be attributed to misunderstandings or overconfidence on the part of the initiator). For reported instances where consent would be more salient (when interactions are over a long stretch of time), the study found that 15% of respondents answered yes to the question: “did you have at least one experience of vaginal or anal sex with someone when [they] really did not want to…or … because the other person persistently tried to make moves even after [they] said no?” As with the other questions, the study conducted data analysis on responses to this question and broke-down the various situations that befell the female respondents (as reported in the Student Life article): About 75% said that they had sex “because they did not want to hurt the other person’s feelings,” “because they were hoping it would lead to something more romantically,” or “because they were in a relationship with the other person and they wanted to have sex.” About 18% said they had sex “because they did not want to be judged negatively,” 14% said that they “had vaginal or anal sex at least one time because they did not want to be seen as inexperienced, 16% said that they “had wanted to have manual sex or oral sex and were pressured into vaginal or anal sex at least one time,” 6% said that they “had vaginal or anal sex because someone physically forced them to,” and 2% had vaginal or anal sex at least one time because they were drugged.”

Upon reading these situations it becomes apparent that many of these recorded instances are not anything akin to sexual assault. Obviously, the final two statistics are horrifying as they do define characteristic cases of rape, however it is notable that together they comprise 8% of the 15% of the sorority students who reported having experienced any form of unwanted sexual contact (again sorority members are more likely to attend fraternity-hosted parties). It turns out that this fraction of the total surveyed population only represents 1.2% of the total surveyed Wash U sorority members. While obviously far from ideal given that percentage is not 0, it is far less frightening than the “15%” of women that the Student Life article presented.

[su_pullquote align=”right”]What harm could come from increased caution and awareness at universities like Wash U? Inherent in any shocking and horrifying publication is the psychological harm which ensues.[/su_pullquote]Does it matter if the sexual assault numbers are inflated? What harm could come from increased caution and awareness at universities like Wash U? Inherent in any shocking and horrifying publication is the psychological harm which ensues. Given the gaping flaws of the study described above, the Student Life publication should shy away from definitive conclusions and serious speculation about potential implications. This is especially true for a topic as fraught as sexual assault at Wash U. This study was published on the front page of the most circulated newspaper at Wash U, with the intent of raising awareness and “start[ing] a conversation,” which is an intent that should be foremost in the discussion. Unfortunately, Student Life was, at minimum, unfathomably irresponsible given the self-admitted implications that could be “devastating” to anyone who read the article or glanced at the massive graph on the front page.

[su_pullquote]Unfortunately, Student Life was, at minimum, unfathomably irresponsible given the self-admitted implications that could be “devastating” to anyone who read the article or glanced at the massive graph on the front page.[/su_pullquote]The fact seems to be lost in this discussion that Wash U is perhaps the safest outdoor space in the entire state of Missouri, and thus the risk of sexual assault would be higher off-campus. Yet in spite of this, there exists an ever-present apprehension to walking alone at night on campus. This is not restricted to Wash U, as many of the top universities across the country suffer from a harmful, ambient fear of sexual violence. This trend defies the leading statistics on this issue. The Obama-Era organization Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) collected data on the rates of sexual assault for women between the ages of 18-24 and found that these women—while more likely to experience sexual assault than other age groups—were actually less likely to experience sexual assault than their non-college peers of the same age. The diagram below is taken from a RAINN Web page:

The lower rate of sexual violence experienced by other age groups is attributable to the higher rates of marriage, lower exposure to parties (where individuals experience higher rates of sexual violence), less sexual activity, and less risk-taking behavior overall. Therefore, the lower rate of sexual violence for women outside of the 18-24 age bracket is not a result of a lower probability of sexual assault per encounter, but rather a lower probability of sexual assault due to fewer risky encounters in total.

[su_pullquote align=”right”]In dispelling misconceptions about the threat of sexual assault against college women, imagine the relief and peace of mind in realizing that the danger is far lower than previously surmised and is, in any case, entirely manageable with a healthy dose of caution.[/su_pullquote]In dispelling misconceptions about the threat of sexual assault against college women, imagine the relief and peace of mind in realizing that the danger is far lower than previously surmised and is, in any case, entirely manageable with a healthy dose of caution (e.g., always bring a vigilant friend to a party that features alcohol).

With that in mind, ask yourself the following:

Which is more empowering for women (or any who fear sexual violence) — the thought that they are constantly at risk of being groped, assaulted or raped throughout their time on campus? Or the idea that they live in a generally safe environment in which they can explore their sexual identity and can learn how to navigate sexuality through education and personal experience in a fashion that would lead them to be better equipped for the real world?

Johnathan Romero ‘20 studies in the College of Arts & Sciences. He can be reached at johnathan.romero@wustl.edu.