Discussion List for campus-based and allied personnel working to end gender-based violence on campus.

Hannah,
 
You wrote:  I think one of the problems with Sex Signals is that it is  very 
victim blaming. If it's all about miscommunication then the victim is told  
that they just didn't speak clearly what they wanted, or that they didn't 
speak  
loud enough, or that they didn't speak up enough. Or maybe they would believe 
 that they said "no" but that their body language, dress, etc. said "yes". As 
 advocates, we know this is not the case, but when we say that rape is about  
miscommunication, we not only send this message to the victims, but we give 
an  excuse to the perpetrators ("well, I thought she was just playing"). I 
think  this is a dangerous program to introduce.

Hannah Lindsay

I wrote:  A wise colleague reminded me at a conference yesterday that  in the 
prevention field when things get tough, we circle the wagons and shoot  
inward.
 
I really want to amplify on this.  I would not be pushing back if this  
appeared to me to be constructive.  I've seen Sex Signals at least seven  
times, 
and I wonder if some of those commenting have really paid attention to  what 
it 
really says.  None of you seem to be offering constructive ways for  Sex 
Signals to hit its target more accurately.  You're just flinging  arrows.  I 
have 
always found Gail and Christian eager to learn and evolve  the presentation.  
What you saw several years ago is not the same as what  is presented today.  
Sex Signals may not be to your personal risk reduction  preference, but to 
say 
that it is dangerous is irresponsible.  Kumbe  Ginane, who speaks to groups 
about how he was falsely accused and convicted at  UC Boulder IS dangerous. 
 
A thoughtful program like Sex Signals may not convey the message exactly  the 
way you would, but that does not detract from the fact that on many  
campuses, it has been an important element, even a cornerstone of a 
successful  risk 
reduction educational strategy.  
 
There is an age old debate about whether educating potential victims on  ways 
to reduce risk is victim-blaming.  I don't subscribe to the philosophy  that 
all our efforts ought to be prevention-focused, because we need to be  
comprehensive.  A risk reduction program does not equal a failure to hold  
rapists 
(men) accountable, unless we fail to follow-up something like Sex  Signals 
with 
good programming on identifying predation and bystander  intervention.  For 
holistic effect, it has to be "both/and" rather than  "either/or".  
 
Regards,

Brett A. Sokolow, JD
Special Counsel to  the President, Hobart and William Smith Colleges
Special Counsel for Student  Conduct Issues, Warren Wilson College
Special Advisor to the Dean of Campus  Life, Univ. of the Incarnate Word

President, The National Center for  
Higher Education Risk Management, Ltd.
"Best Practices for Student  Health and Safety"

(a not-for-profit  corporation)
20 Callery Way
Malvern, PA  19355-2969
Tel. (610) 993-0229
Fax (610)  993-0228
www.ncherm.org
<BR><BR><BR>**************************************<BR> AOL now offers free 
email to everyone.  Find out more about what's free from AOL at 
http://www.aol.com.