Pepperdine’s policy of not disciplining sexual assault victims who are drunk creates an unfair precedent that discourages reporting other injured students.
By Andrea Banda
Assistant Opinions Editor
“The reporting party will not be subject to disciplinary sanction as a result of her or his involvement in the circumstances leading up to the occurrence of a sexual assault offense.”
The change in the 2002-2003 Student Handbook is excusing some for their irresponsible conduct while punishing others, and it is completely out of line. What this rule tells Pepperdine students is that you can get drunk and if you happen to be sexually assaulted, don’t worry about getting punished for the drinking. It is patronizing the people who were victims of these sexual assault incidents, but disregarding the fact that their alcohol-related actions may have led up to the assault.
What is appalling about this new rule is that people who claim they were victims of a sexual assault incident do not have to face the consequences of their actions leading up to the event. If someone drinks and gets so drunk that he or she wakes up in the morning with someone else in a strange place, naked, and don’t remember what happened, then he or she is also at fault.
No, the victim didn’t ask to be sexually assaulted, but everyone knows that getting drunk alters your state of mind. There is no excuse for that. If people put themselves in that position by being completely intoxicated, then they also need to suffer the disciplinary consequences.
Two years ago one of my best friends from high school knew of such an incident involving a girl who lived in her dorm at the University of New Mexico. The girl had been drinking at a party and was seriously intoxicated. The next morning she woke up when some guy she didn’t even know was forcing himself on her. Is she also guilty in the incident? I think so.
My heart goes out to people who are victims of sexual assault, but at the same time, it’s hard to have much sympathy for the people who could have prevented it by avoiding alcohol. We are all adults and we have to take responsibility for our actions, even if that means being disciplined by Pepperdine.
But while the revised rules are too lenient on some, they’re too harsh on others. What the new rule also does is exclude students with extreme alcohol problems from protection from the university. If a student is found in a dorm shower, passed out from alcohol poisoning, then he or she may be punished by the university. Whereas the sexual assault victim is seen as innocent in the sexual assault situation and is excluded from punishment, the student with an alcohol problem pays.
There is very little that makes these two alcohol-related situations different. Both involved free will regarding alcohol consumption, and the consequences should be handled in the same way. If the administration is going to make exceptions on the drinking rule for sexual assault victims, then they should also do it for students who suffer from alcohol poisoning.
As Folayo Lasaki said in the Graphic two weeks ago, “That says to me when your friend is so drunk that they’re about to die, have somebody rape them.”
The new rule does encourage victims of sexual assault to seek help from the university, which it very well should, but it discourages alcohol abusers with serious problems from doing so. If they mention an incident where they were drinking on campus, the wording of this rule technically says that they qualify for punishment, even though the administration claims otherwise. Because of the rule alcohol abusers will have a greater fear of coming forward to admit they have a problem and want help.
I truly believe that this university is willing to help anyone, whether they are rape victims or alcohol abusers. As a Christian university, Pepperdine should help students overcome problems in their lives. The university needs to make it clearer that while they have compassion for victims of sexual assault, that they also have this same compassion for students with serious alcohol problems.
To state in the handbook that this compassion only applies to victims of sexual assault is out of line with the Christian philosophy and mission of our university. The administration needs to think this rule over and make some changes.
The administration should make all possible efforts to provide assistance to both victims of sexual assault and serious drinking problems, but also punish them equally. People shouldn’t look at it as getting in trouble because he or she was raped, but instead getting in trouble because of the drinking that occurred beforehand. It’s the same thing as taking responsibility for your actions.
October 03, 2002