果冻传媒app官方

Table of Contents

Victory for Fundamental Fairness at Gettysburg College

果冻传媒app官方

GETTYSBURG, Pa., August 20, 2007 鈥 After more than a year of public pressure from the Foundation for Individual Rights in Education (果冻传媒app官方), Gettysburg College has amended its controversial Sexual Misconduct Policy. Gettysburg students are finally free from the draconian policy, which failed to distinguish between an innocent, spontaneous hug and forcible rape.

鈥淎ccording to the old, ludicrous policy, practically every person at Gettysburg College was guilty of sexual misconduct, leaving it up to administrators to enforce the policy as they chose,鈥 FIREPresident Greg Lukianoff said. 鈥淲e are pleased that Gettysburg has at last revised this policy.鈥

FIRE first called for a repeal of Gettysburg鈥檚 original policy in May 2006, stating that although Gettysburg that 鈥渢hey enjoy the same rights鈥hat other citizens enjoy,鈥 the school鈥檚 old Sexual Misconduct Policy infringed on students鈥 rights to due process and fundamental fairness. Despite months of agreeing to undertake an administrative review and revision of the Sexual Misconduct Policy, Gettysburg continued to maintain it. In response, FIREadded Gettysburg to its Red Alert list, where FIREhighlights the 鈥渨orst of the worst鈥 offenders against liberty on campus. In light of the policy change, Gettysburg will be removed from 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 Red Alert list.

The original policy鈥檚 broad definition of sexual interaction included not only sex acts but also 鈥渂rushing, touching, grabbing, pinching, patting, hugging, and kissing,鈥 drawing no distinction between innocent hugging and sex crimes. FIRE wrote to Gettysburg President Katherine Haley Will on April 11, 2006, urging her to revise the policy, because it 鈥渢rivialize[d] sexual assault by equating it with normal and legal behavior,鈥 and because it criminalized so much everyday student conduct that it could not possibly be enforced across the board, therefore vesting the university administration with the power to arbitrarily punish innocent student conduct. The revised policy has eliminated the language equating rape with mere hugging and instead prohibits 鈥淸s]exual misconduct, including sexual assault, [which] is defined as deliberate physical contact of a sexual nature without the other person鈥檚 consent.鈥

A second pressing problem with Gettysburg鈥檚 original policy was its definition of 鈥渃onsent,鈥 which the school called 鈥渢he act of willingly and verbally agreeing (for example, by stating 鈥榶es鈥) to engage in specific sexual conduct. If either person at any point in a sexual encounter does not give continuing and active consent, all sexual contact must cease, even if consent was given earlier.鈥 (Emphasis added.) Such a convoluted definition required individuals to not only obtain verbal consent before engaging in virtually any physical contact, but to continue to ask for and receive verbal consent for the duration of the act. The new policy more aptly defines 鈥渆ffective consent鈥 as consent that is 鈥渋nformed, freely and actively given, using mutually understandable words or actions which indicate a willingness to participate in mutually agreed upon sexual activity.鈥

鈥淕ettysburg鈥檚 revised policy is a great improvement,鈥 Lukianoff said. 鈥淕ettysburg students can breathe a sigh of relief today, as they are no longer all criminals under university policy.鈥

FIRE is a nonprofit educational foundation that unites civil rights and civil liberties leaders, scholars, journalists, and public intellectuals from across the political and ideological spectrum on behalf of individual rights, due process, freedom of expression, academic freedom, and rights of conscience at our nation鈥檚 colleges and universities. 果冻传媒app官方鈥檚 efforts to preserve liberty at Gettysburg College can be viewed at www.thefire.org.

CONTACT:
Greg Lukianoff, President, 果冻传媒app官方: 215-717-3473; greg_lukianoff@thefire.org

Recent Articles

FIRE鈥檚 award-winning Newsdesk covers the free speech news you need to stay informed.

Share