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

["Brad Fels" <>]

To members of the SAPC list-serve,

As the Content Director for nformd.net, I'd like to join in this
dialogue about our program, if I may. First and foremost, I want to
say that we greatly appreciate any and all discussion of our program,
positive or negative, because it helps us better understand the needs
of the community, what we're doing well, what we need to work on, etc.

I know we all share the goal of reducing sexual assault on campus, and
we at nformd.net are dedicated to making nformd.on.sexual.assault the
most effective tool it can be for you and your school. I should say
that we hold no aspirations that our program is perfect. However, our
research also suggests that nformd.on.sexual.assault positively
impacts student attitudes and understanding, and we intend to
continually revise our program as the years go by to address concerns,
such as the ones raised here, to ensure that the program evolves.

With that in mind, I will address some concerns in an itemized way. I
also would love to discuss any or all of these same issues with anyone
who wants to contact me. Please reach me on my cell phone at
724-464-7869 or at 
.

GLBT

Regardless of what the present program may or may not portray,
everyone here at nformd.net is deeply concerned that all people are
treated equally. We disdain discrimination of any kind and for any
reason. While the goal of this program is to address the problem of
sexual assault, we would hate to think that we are doing so in a way
that promotes homophobia or any other kind of discrimination.

We made a choice to show a male against male rape because many
straight men cannot understand why male against female rape IS rape
instead of just being some kind of unwanted sex that she starts to
enjoy somewhere during the experience. Not wanting to promote
homophobia in any way, we were careful to always refer to the male
against male rape as "rape," never as sex, to emphasize the idea that
rape is the problematic concept. Similarly, we took care to point out
that the vast majority of male against male rape occurs by straight
men rather than gay men, and we hoped that doing so would reduce
homophobia rather than promote it. Thus, believing that the male
against male rape analogy would help some male students truly
understand that women actually do not consider rape to be sex, we also
took steps to make sure that the conversation was not promoting
homophobia.

Was that the proper course? I suppose that is one of the main topics
this discussion is debating. I wanted to communicate to all of you the
rationale for our decision, and if the result turns out to be that we
are promoting homophobia, we will take action accordingly.  For
example, would it help delineate between the discussion of rape and
sexuality if at the start of that section we stated that "the
following scenes are only discussions of rape and not statements about
consensual sex between any two people"?

I also would like to note that we have determined plans over the next
year or two, as soon as we are able re-shoot the program, to add
discussion about GLBT sexual assault, as well as sexual assault in
other communities, such as African-American, Latino, religious, etc.
        
Therefore, our goal was in no way to promote homophobia, only to help
men understand the problem of rape. To what extent we have achieved
that is an important question to us, and we appreciate how this
discussion helps us consider that issue once again.

Multi-Tasking
        
We certainly cannot guarantee that students won't multi-task during
our program. As a college professor, I also really cannot guarantee
that they won't multitask during class, though I can minimize it. We
have taken several measures to combat this problem:  First, we
recommend requiring students to complete the program before arriving
on campus, as this imbues it with a certain seriousness, especially
since they are doing it at home, alone, without any friends telling
them answers. Second, the pre- and post-testing helps to ensure that
students take the test seriously, especially if schools require a
particular post-test grade. Third, in the near future, the test will
be randomized for each student, thus ensuring that they cannot go
online and find the answer key. We are confident that these measures
do a great deal to foster attentiveness.

Emotional Connection
        
Clearly, live presentations and videos are different mediums. However,
we think video can have a powerful emotional impact, and many
responses from students who have viewed the program state quite
plainly that the survivor testimonials make a big impact on them
emotionally. More importantly, however, I'd like you to know that we
never view our program as mutually exclusive with other programming.
Instead, we believe our program can help establish a strong foundation
of knowledge with students, making all other campus programming more
effective. The more programming the students have on this issue, the
better.

Acting
        
We concede that the acting is a little scripted and sometimes a little
hokey. We're going to address this in future versions but it also
seems important to note that students review the program very
positively.

Physical Resistance
        
This was a difficult issue for us. As you know, telling people to
resist physically accomplishes little towards their actually doing so.
Most people seem to resort to flight much more easily than fight.
Therefore, we decided to offer the verbal judo as an easily accessible
tool. At no point, however, do we contradict the idea of physically
resisting, which we view as something a potential victim will or will
not do regardless of what we say, especially if verbal judo fails.

Verbal Judo
        
There have been some concerns that offering verbal judo techniques
portrays the idea that it is the would-be victim's responsibility to
not be assaulted.  We believe we have been very careful not to cast
the responsibility on would-be victims; we state repeatedly that rape
is never the survivor's fault. We also believe that there is a
critical difference between arming people with tools to get out of a
bad situation and blaming them for not getting out of that situation.

Were I to find myself in a bad situation of any kind, I would hope to
have tools to help myself emerge from that situation unscathed. In
fact, we want to offer all people as many tools as possible to combat
sexual assault from all angles--as bystanders, as potential victims,
as citizens, etc. Women who've taken our program seem to appreciate
being taught the idea of Verbal Judo, with almost 90% of them rating
that section of the program positively.

Overall, our program seeks and is designed for cultural change, which
we absolutely agree to be the primary objective of all programming
against sexual assault. However, for those persons who find themselves
in potential rape situations, we feel a responsibility to offer them
possible solutions for their personal safety. At that point, it does
not matter what the culture is or should be, or if the perpetrator is
intentional or not. The most important thing, as I suspect everyone
agrees wholeheartedly, is that the would-be victim escapes.

With respect to the question of the nature of perpetrators, we embrace
emerging research that many perpetrators are conscious of their
actions and that such perpetrators account for many campus rapes. We
also see a tremendous volume of research demonstrating widespread
acceptance of rape myths. Students who cannot define rape are more
likely to be involved in one, e.g. if one or both parties believe a
perpetrator has a right to finish intercourse once it is started, then
non-consent may never be voiced and/or respected.

Regardless, even some conscious perpetrators may be offset through
crafty dialogue. While we can debate the particular verbal judo
strategies suggested in the program, we would like to keep it in mind
that we ask women to devise their own. More importantly, we also are
offering a way of viewing the problem that affords many people an
option they otherwise may never have considered. If nothing else,
attempting verbal judo is harmless because doing so in no way
diminishes the ability to scream or fight back.

Results
        
Despite some imperfections, we have some very strong research results
that show that students do watch our program, learn from it, and even
appreciate it. 3 of 4 students recommend the program for their peers,
and we have very positive ratings for the majority of the program.

As for pricing, we are doing what we can to keep the cost reasonable
so that the program can reach as many students as possible. We have
even implemented a direct student pay method so that implementation of
our program costs universities nothing.

Once again, as we all have common goals, we are happy to discuss any
of the issues above and we appreciate the dialogue here because we are
committed to creating the best possible tool we can for combating
sexual assault. We care deeply about this issue and the program itself
and want to make it as successful as possible so as to have the
greatest possible positive impact on our society.

Thank you all for your thoughtful discussion of
nformd.on.sexual.assault. This really helps keep our gears turning.

Sincerely,

Steven J. Pearlman, Ph.D.
Content Director, nformd.net