• About
  • Editorial Board
    • Staff Writers
  • Advertise
  • Join Us
  • Archives
The Wellesley News -
  • News and Features
    • Professor Phillip Levine Discusses “A Problem of Fit”
      Professor Phillip Levine Discusses “A Problem of Fit”
    • CS Department shifts CS 111 course structure
      CS Department shifts CS 111 course structure
    • WAMI and WRJ host discussion on criminalization of abortion
      WAMI and WRJ host discussion on criminalization of abortion
    • News
      • News in Brief
      • Nation & World
      • President’s Corner
      • Senate Report
    • Features
      • Alumnae Spotlight
      • Eye on Science
      • Faculty Focus
      • LGBTQIA+ Column
  • Opinions
    • Andrew tate: ending the cycle of toxic masculinity
      Andrew tate: ending the cycle of toxic masculinity
    • Turn it off: healing from news fatigue in the digital age
      Turn it off: healing from news fatigue in the digital age
    • Let them eat bread: the unequal effects of food price inflation
      Let them eat bread: the unequal effects of food price inflation
    • Staff Editorial
    • Letters to the Editor
    • The Elephant in the Room
  • Arts
    • The 95th Academy Awards Nominations: The Cool and The Controversial
      The 95th Academy Awards Nominations: The Cool and The Controversial
    • Lucy Dacus Brings a Minimal Yet Powerful Performance to Northeastern University
      Lucy Dacus Brings a Minimal Yet Powerful Performance to Northeastern University
    • “Glass Onion” Takes Shots at Easy Targets
      “Glass Onion” Takes Shots at Easy Targets
    • Arts In The News
    • Reviews
    • Music Peek
    • Books Before Boys
  • Sports and Wellness
    • Student-Athlete of October
      Student-Athlete of October
    • Athletics Update Oct. 19, 2022
      Athletics Update Oct. 19, 2022
    • The Case for Body Neutrality
      The Case for Body Neutrality
    • Athlete of the Week
    • Boston Sports Update
    • The Vegan Digest
    • The SHE Corner
  • The Wellesley Snooze
    • Rejected Snooze Articles for the Week
      Rejected Snooze Articles for the Week
    • Happy Valentine’s Day from Spog
      Happy Valentine’s Day from Spog
    • The Four Best Places to Loudly FaceTime Someone on Campus
      The Four Best Places to Loudly FaceTime Someone on Campus
  • Miscellanea
    • President’s Column: The Butterfly Effect
      President’s Column: The Butterfly Effect
    • Administrators shocked to learn that students dislike being left in dark
      Administrators shocked to learn that students dislike being left in dark
    • 50 Lies You Tell Yourself in Order to Survive Until Graduation
      50 Lies You Tell Yourself in Order to Survive Until Graduation
    • The Dose
    • The Olive Branch
    • Multimedia
      • Galleries
      • Infographics
      • Videos
By Becca Pachl OpinionsNovember 13, 2018

Title IX protects those who Emily Yoffe and Wellesley College disempower

Photo Courtesy of New America

Dear President Johnson, Wellesley administration, staff, and faculty; Wellesley community, and friends:

On Nov. 14, the Freedom Project plans to host Emily Yoffe — a contributing editor of The Atlantic, contributing writer at Huffington Post and a member of the Wellesley Class of 1977 — to speak on “Title IX and the Disempowerment of Women.” Yoffe has written extensively on sexual assault on college campuses, particularly on how Title IX denies due-process to accused parties in sexual assault investigations.

Title IX is a US civil rights law that prevents sex-based discrimination in educational institutions, mandating legal standards that colleges and universities must comply with in order to continue receiving federal financial assistance. Many institutions, including Wellesley College, have Title IX departments that assure federal compliance by investigating allegations of sex discrimination, particularly sexual assault and rape.

For the upcoming lecture, The Freedom Project has presented Yoffe as a champion of women and minority rights — an accomplished journalist critiquing an essential system in good faith. However, Yoffe is no such person: Her journalist career is built on casting doubt upon Title IX, the #MeToo movement and the validity of sexual assault survivors’ experiences. From her victim-blaming ideology ––  showcased in her Slate piece titled “College Women: Stop Getting Drunk” –– to her dismissal of affirmative consent and rape culture at large, Yoffe has purported a toxic ideology of rape and consent that emboldens sexual violence.

Yoffe’s problematic ideology is compounded by the Freedom Project’s decision to host Yoffe’s lecture a mere month after the Brett Kavanaugh hearings. On Oct. 6, Kavanaugh was appointed to the U.S. Supreme Court, despite Dr. Christine Blasey Ford’s allegations that Kavanaugh sexually assaulted her as a young, high school student. Kavanaugh’s confirmation hearing was a toxic time-period for survivors of sexual assault, who on campus and across the country relieved their experiences through secondary trauma, a well-researched and academically-validated phenomenon. Despite Wellesley’s population encompassing those more statistically prone to sexual violence, Wellesley College and its administration were negligent in ensuring the well-being of its student survivors. Through its silence during the Kavanaugh hearings, and its sanction of Yoffe’s lecture on campus, Wellesley College is undeniably implicated in Yoffe’s narrative that contributes to ––  not subverts –– the disempowerment of marginalized communities.

In one of her most polarizing pieces, “The College Rape Overcorrection,” Yoffe criticizes affirmative consent, a definition of consent championed by activists that calls for both parties of a sexual encounter to express positive, voluntary consent. Affirmative consent is a fundamental component of Wellesley College’s definition of consensual sexual activity. Wellesley states in its online Student Sexual Misconduct Policy that consent must be “affirmative, voluntary, knowing, and continuous agreement to engage in a specific form of sexual activity.” Moreover, Wellesley writes that “consent may not be inferred from silence or lack of resistance to sexual advances, or from prior consensual sexual contact.” Wellesley’s Title IX policy starkly contrasts with Yoffe’s stance on consent. In regards to the Title IX policy of Ohio State University, which similarly adopts affirmative consent, Yoffe writes in “The College Rape Overcorrection” that these expectations for consent are unreasonable, and that “two young people who want to engage in sexual congress might be well advised to first consult with the philosophy department and the law school.”

However, affirmative consent is not too high a standard to hold sexual parties to, and it does not require a philosophy department or law school to comprehend. In fact, affirmative consent is quite simple. It means asking a sexual partner before initiating sexual contact, not assuming consent from past experiences or from lack of protest. It means speaking to the person you want to have sex with, and respecting their boundaries when they decline –– even during the act.

In “The College Rape Overcorrection,” Yoffe interviewed social psychologist Carol Tavris, who claimed such definitions of consent contribute to the blurring of lines between rape, unwanted sex, and drunk, consensual sex –– that one party later “regrets.” Tarvis argued that calling all these experiences sexual assault or rape “doesn’t teach them to take responsibility for their decisions, for their reluctance to speak up.” Conceptualizing consent in this way reduces an attacker’s responsibility, placing the burden on the victim and their ability to react in an unwanted encounter. Consent should operate as a two-way street, without the responsibility shouldered by one person. Consent is a commitment between two or more people to speak to each other and ensure voluntary, active participation. Anything else is rape — there is no meaningful difference between rape and unwanted sex.

In “The Problem With Campus Sexual Assault Surveys,” Yoffe also criticizes the widely used statistic that “1 in 5 women are raped on college campuses” for its liberal understanding of sexual assault. Yoffe writes that this statistic stems from the 2007 Campus Sexual Assault Study, where the “1 in 5” measure accounts for all nonconsensual sexual contact ranging “from penetration to kissing to being groped over one’s clothes.” Yoffe raises this point as an attempt to argue that college campuses are not as dangerous as activists portray them to be. However, Yoffe’s logic raises the question: even if a person experiences groping or another non-penetrative act, is this experience not worthy of censure as an act of rape? Yoffe seems to insinuate that sexual trauma can be parsed by severity, as if “lesser” traumas can undermine “serious” ones — that because some women may be groped and not raped, colleges are a safer place for women after all. The fact remains that any violence against women is cause for action, and there exists no baseline at which sexual victimization becomes permissible. Attempting to state otherwise, even inadvertently, furthers the sexist ideology that violence against women is merited in certain circumstances. Furthermore, a 2016 study by the Bureau of Justice Statistics still found that 1 in 5 women on college campuses have experienced sexual assault, defined by the BJS as “sexual assault, rape, and/or sexual battery.”

In her writing, particularly in her criticism of the Hunting Ground — an explosive documentary about the prevalence of sexual assault on college campuses —Yoffe laments the consequences that being an accused rapist may have on a young person’s life chances while failing to acknowledge that being raped is far more detrimental to a person’s physically and emotional well-being. Again in “The Problem With Campus Sexual Assault Surveys,” Yoffe criticizes “the chasm” between the amount of sexual violence reported on campus rape surveys and the amount reported to authorities. In the 2007 Campus Sexual Assault Study, over 50 percent of the respondents who experienced sexual assault but did not report indicated that they chose not to report because they believed it was not serious enough to report. Such behavior is consistent with both academic findings and the many stories told through the #MeToo movement: survivors often internalize shame and do not feel their stories are worthy of being shared. Yoffe ignores this well-established fact to further write off the “1 in 5” statistic, asking readers how one can understand “respondents who attest that they’ve experienced such a vile assault yet don’t find it serious enough to report?” Yoffe uses the “chasm” of non-reporters as a way to delegitimize the effects of sexual assault, ignoring how reporting one’s’ experience of sexual violence can be dehumanizing, degrading, and often lead to nowhere judicially, most aptly demonstrated by Dr. Ford’s recent experiences during the senate hearings on Brett Kavanaugh.

The Freedom Project attempts to frame Yoffe’s lecture as intersectional, promising to both address the disempowerment of women and the higher rates of rape accusations against men of color. However, Yoffe fails to recognize that instead of redressing these injustices, she further proports standards of rape that sanctify violence against women, especially women of color.  Yoffe also fails to connect that gendered violence is closely related to white supremacy, a well-researched phenomenon aptly described in the Anti-Defamation League’s report: When Women are the Enemy: The Intersection of Misogyny and White Supremacy. Yoffe also ignores sexual assault and rape as an issue existing outside of a heteronormative, gender binary — an unsurprising fact given that Yoffe has a history of ignoring LGBTQIA+ issues and once went so far as to suggest to a bisexual reader that she would be better off staying in the closet. Yoffe has made a career of minimizing the autonomy of survivors and the severity of violence against women on college campuses, contributing to a narrative that disempowers women and other marginalized groups. In exercising her constitutional right to express her views, Yoffe has neglected any responsibility for the way her ideas reinforce pervasive systems of inequality, like rape culture and white male supremacy.

While several faculty members have expressed their concerns at Yoffe’s invitation to campus through a faculty-staff forum, no one has yet spoken publicly about how Yoffe’s invitation is a symptom of a larger problem: Wellesley College’s striking apathy towards sexual violence, especially in regards to the way it deeply affects hundreds of its students. I believe a larger dialogue must take place — one that addresses the insensitivity of Wellesley College to bring a sexual-violence skeptic to campus just weeks after the virulent Kavanaugh hearings. During the Kavanaugh hearings, Wellesley College hosted no vigil (besides an event led by survivors themselves), failed to increase their counseling or emergency support, and left survivors to feel isolated, given that no group-counseling exists for survivors. President Johnson never even publicly spoke on the issue, with just the Vice President issuing a lack-luster email about how survivors can help themselves if the news cycle has them feeling down.

On Nov. 14, Yoffe will invalidate sexual violence and its harrowing effects on survivors; Wellesley College, through approving this lecture, is inextricably implicated by their silence on the matter. For a college dedicated to fostering and empowering its students, Wellesley College has demonstratively failed its survivors and its larger student body. As a student who transferred to Wellesley College after being raped at her former college campus, Wellesley College’s inaction is a familiar, yet bitter disappointment.

 

Sincerely,

Becca Pachl, Class of 2020

 

Share on

  • Facebook
  • Twitter
  • Pinterest
  • Google +
  • LinkedIn
  • Email
Previous articleThe Killing of Jamal Khashoggi: What’s Next for Saudi Arabia
Next articleThe patchwork quilt of Democratic America

You may also like

Logos of social media apps such as Twitter, Tiktok, Netflix, Spotify, and Discord.

Andrew tate: ending the cycle of toxic masculinity

Abstract painting of various boxes meant to imply computer and phone screens

Turn it off: healing from news fatigue in the digital age

A collection of a wide variety of foods in the colors of the rainbow

Let them eat bread: the unequal effects of food price inflation

7 Comments

  • Genevieve Rogers says:
    November 13, 2018 at 10:48 PM

    This is a powerful letter. Thank you for writing it. Survivors and students deserve better ❤️

    Reply
  • Reader says:
    November 14, 2018 at 5:41 PM

    Whenever people go on about how disagreement with a given policy constitutes “denying lived experiences” or other word salad, you know you’re getting a load of ideologically charged bullshit.

    Pachl should attend the event, she might learn something.

    Reply
  • Anonymous says:
    November 14, 2018 at 9:44 PM

    I think the author needs to re-read the study she cites: https://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

    It gives an incidence rate of 6.1 per 1,000 female students. This is nowhere near 1 in 5.

    Reply
  • ThirteenthLetter says:
    November 14, 2018 at 10:27 PM

    You need to go to your professors and ask for a tuition refund, if this is what they’re teaching you.

    Reply
  • MB says:
    November 15, 2018 at 4:00 PM

    I would be more amenable to this argument if the author had read Ms. Yoffe’s work, which she clearly has not.

    Reply
  • Melissa says:
    November 27, 2018 at 8:14 PM

    This editorial / commentary is a good example of an intellectual monoculture. Orthodox religions have a similar problem.

    If you think for yourself…. better keep your mouth shut.

    And so we are told Yoffe should do the same.

    Reply
  • Gregory Smith says:
    November 28, 2018 at 8:43 AM

    “there is no meaningful difference between rape and unwanted sex” is one of the most troublingly ignorant statements I’ve read in a serious publication. Like most crimes, rape requires there to be awareness on the part of the perpetrator of the absence of consent. Deliberately evading paying for an item in a retail store is shoplifting; absent-mindedly walking out of the store without paying for it is not. “Affirmative consent” policies are an effort to make people into criminals for failing to read minds. Yoffe has meticulously and honestly reported on the damage inflicted by them.

    Reply

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Email Newsletter

Sign up to receive our weekly digest in your inbox

* indicates required

Top Articles

  • Logos of social media apps such as Twitter, Tiktok, Netflix, Spotify, and Discord. Andrew tate: ending the cycle of toxic masculinity
  • Stone-Davis dining staff report mistreatment
  • The 95th Academy Awards Nominations: The Cool and The Contro...
  • A collection of a wide variety of foods in the colors of the rainbow Let them eat bread: the unequal effects of food price inflat...
  • Red envelope that contains money to celebrate the Lunar New Year. America’s cultural appropriation is a modern form of i...

Recent Tweets

Tweets by @Wellesley_News

The independent student newspaper of Wellesley College since 1901.

Sign up to receive our weekly digest in your inbox

* indicates required

  • About
  • Editorial Board
    • Staff Writers
  • Advertise
  • Join Us
  • Archives
COPYRIGHT © 2023 THE WELLESLEY NEWS
Back to top