WORK IN PROGRESS PLEASE CHECK WITH DAVID BURNS SHOULD YOU WISH TO CITE OR QUOTE FROM THIS WORK.a BP [rx fe pts Iv. Acquaintance Rape Workshop David Burns January, 1986 Community Standards and University Judicial Issues. Good Afternoon: The 1974 Statement of Mission for Rutgers University reiterates a philosophy contaiend in an earlier statement. It states: "The University bases its policies ont he following fundamental beliefs: © that an individual is of paramount value both in his own right and as a citizen of a democratic society; that a free man must lead a thoughtful life, that his thinking must be based on adequate knowledge and his acceptance of moral ‘Pesponsibilities; and that personal fulfillment and social effectiveness result therefrom." (1) Eleven years later we can pardon the use of the masculine pronoun and understand that it is this very sense of mission--this attempt to define what this community, this university, means--which should tell us how we need to address the issue of community standards for the subject of today's conference and all subjects. When, in the course of establishing a number of our policies, we speak about the university community, we are making a claim about our communion, our commonality. We are also distinguishing ourselves from other communities. This distinction can help us understand why we can claim to have standards which do not simply reflect, but can improve upon, standards of other communities. When we think about the subject that we are gathered here to talk about today, we need to think about our community. Who are we? We are men and women who assemble here to work together, to study together, to grow together as staff, faculty and students. What our values are--about the subject of today's conference or any other subject~-and how we display those values by our actions and words will define the operating (real) values of the university. To say that an individual is of paramount value in his own right is to make a claim that can easily be understood in terms of what is and what is not exploitation. As Alice Lemonchek would have it, in her book, Dehumanizing Women, the very objectification of women and the failure of men's part to accord them the status of moral equals, is one of the basis of their degradation and dehumanization. (2) To follow our mission, we must see individuals as ends, not means, and seeing women as ends entails according them the status of moral equals. (3) When we talk about sexual assault, we are talking about acts which cannot be based in the idea that another individual is of paramount value in her own right. Rather, as the literature has suggested in so many ways, tape and assault are means to subordinateAcquaintance Rape January 14, 1986 Page 2 _ the victim to the dominance of the perpetrator.(4) Rape uses someone as @ means, not an end. University communities do not often come together to discuss their values; ordinarily their values can be inferred from how they behave. While we have elegant statements of value that do put great importance in the value of individuals, it is in our everyday behavior that we can demonstrate the extent to which we believe and practice these values. Today offers us a special opportunity. We have come together to discuss something that we are calling variously "date" or "acquaintance" rape.(5) It is important, it seems to me, to state at the outset that our understanding of what this concept means will reflect our values. How we act when we hear this concept invoked will portray our values. From our discussions, we will be able to determine whether this separate community from society-at-large Will embody the same ambiguity that society-at~large seems to place around these issues or will, as is indicated by a mission statement, seek a higher standard. When I hear conversations about date rape, I am troubled because often I see the adjectives, the modifiers, "date" or "acquaintance", somehow taking something away from the idea of rape. By saying that something is a date rape, we may be defining it as something less than a rape. This is a common mistake. Certain studies suggest that most rapists are known by their victim.(6) However, the extent to which the person is known ‘to the victim predicts the degree to which the rape will be taken seriously by others who have to listen about it and act on it.(7) To say that differently: the very fact of being raped by an acquaintance seems to detract from society's willingness to see this as a "real" rape. To be raped by a stranger or to be brutally beaten helps to establish the claim that it was really rape after all (especially in the oldest context--where rape was essentially a property crime, a rape was a violation of a husband's property rights). To be raped by somebody that you know actually stands slightly in the way of others seeing it as rape. The words, "date" and "acquaintance," when used in connection with rape, do not diminish its meaning, rather they help solidly establish a context in which rape can and does occur. They make a fact more prominent in our consciousness. As others have said, clinically the damage from being raped by someone you know is greater than the damage by being raped by a total stranger, at least in some instances.(8) The reason for this should be obvious: acquaintance rape represents not only an assault and a violation, but a betrayal of trust that causes the victim to change an entire view she had of another person. When we hear the word “date” or "acquaintance" in connection with rape, we need not think that this rape is less serious or somehow a more excusable form of assault. Rather, we simply need to know that we have described the location and type of assault. It would be