Campus-Based Sexual Assault Victim Advocacy and Title IX: Revisiting Tensions Between Grassroots Activism and the Criminal Justice System

Abstract

The Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights’ (OCR) Dear Colleague Letter (DCL) reinvigorated the application of Title IX to campus sexual assault and changed the way campuses are handling these incidents. This article explores Title IX from the standpoint of campus-based victim advocates working within the formal system of higher education and compares this approach to campus sexual assault with historical tensions between feminist grassroots activists and the criminal justice system. Advocates’ mixed allegiances to both the institution and to feminist ideals of survivor empowerment produce conflicts and identify needs for system advocacy.

Keywords

sexual assault social movements victim services qualitative research activism

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Allen

N. E.

Larsen

S. E.

Walden

A. L.

(2011). An overview of community-based services for battered women. In Renzetti

C. M.

Edleson

J. L.

Bergen

R. K.

(Eds.), Sourcebook on violence against women (pp. 245-266). Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

Amar

A. F.

Trout

T. D.

Simpson

Cardiello

Beckford

(2014). Administrators’ perceptions of college campus protocols, response, and student prevention efforts for sexual assault. Violence and Victims, 29, 579-593.

Anderson

M. J.

(2016). Campus sexual assault adjudication and resistance to reform. Yale Law Journal, 125, 1-66.

Association of Title IX Administrators. (2015). Position statement on the need for victim advocates on college campuses. Retrieved from http://www.prnewswire.com/news-releases/atixa-position-statement-on-the-need-for-victim-advocates-on-college-campuses-300126692.html

Bennett

Gregory

D. M.

Loschiavo

Waller

(2014). Student conduct administration & Title IX: Gold standard practices for resolution of allegations of sexual misconduct on college campuses. College Station, TX: Association of Student Conduct Administrators. Retrieved from http://www.theasca.org/files/Publications/ASCA%202014%20Gold%20Standard.pdf

Brubaker

S. J.

(2009). Sexual assault prevalence, reporting, and policies: Comparing college and university campuses and military service academies. The Security Journal, 22, 56-72.

Brubaker

S. J.

Keegan

Guadalupe-Diaz

X. L.

Beasley

B. A.

(2017). Measuring and reporting campus sexual assault: Privilege and exclusion in what we know and what we do. Sociology Compass, 11, e12543.

Brubaker

S. J.

Mancini

(2017). The impact of increased state regulation of campus sexual assault practices: Perspectives of campus personnel. Journal of School Violence, 16, 286-301.

Campbell

(2006). Rape survivors’ experiences with the legal and medical systems: Do rape victim advocates make a difference? Violence against Women, 12, 30-45.

10.

Cantalupo

N. C.

(2016). Title IX’s civil rights approach and the criminal justice system: Enabling separate but coordinated parallel proceedings. In Wotten

S. C.

Mitchell

R. W.

(Eds.), The crisis of campus sexual violence: Critical perspectives on prevention and response (pp. 125-146). New York, NY: Routledge.

11.

Cantrell

(2013). Re-problematizing anger in domestic violence advocacy. Journal of Gender, Social Policy & the Law, 21, 837-863.

12.

Coker

(2004). Race, poverty, and the crime-centered response to domestic violence. Violence Against Women, 10, 1331-1353.

13.

Coker

(2005). Shifting power for battered women: Law, material resources, and poor women of color. In Sokoloff

N. J.

(Ed.), Domestic violence at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender and culture (pp. 369-388). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

14.

Coker

(2006). Restorative justice, Navajo peacemaking and domestic violence. Theoretical Criminology, 10, 67-85.

15.

Crosset

T. W.

(2016). Athletes, sexual assault, and universities’ failure to address rape-prone subcultures on campus. In Wooten

S. C.

Mitchell

R. W.

(Eds.), The crisis of campus sexual violence: Critical perspectives on prevention and response (pp. 74-92). New York NY: Routledge.

16.

Curtis-Fawley

Daly

(2005). Gendered violence and restorative justice: The views of victim advocates. Violence Against Women, 11, 603-638.

17.

Davies

Lyon

(2014). Domestic violence advocacy: Complex lives/difficult choices. Los Angeles, CA: Sage.

18.

DeMatteo

Galloway

Arnold

Patel

(2015). Sexual assault on college campuses: A 50-state survey of criminal sexual assault statutes and their relevance to campus sexual assault. Psychology, Public Policy, and Law, 21, 227-238.

19.

Engle

J. C.

(2014). Mandatory reporting of campus sexual assault and domestic violence: Moving to a victim-centric protocol that comports with federal law. Temple Political & Civil Rights Law Review, 24, 401-421.

20.

Goodmark

(2012). A troubled marriage: Domestic violence and the legal system. New York: New York University Press.

21.

Greenberg

M. A.

Messner

M. A.

(2014). Before prevention: The trajectory and tensions of feminist antiviolence. In Segal

M T.

Demos

(Eds.), Gendered perspectives on conflict and violence: Part B (pp. 225-249). Bingley, UK: Emerald Group.

22.

Haaken

(2017). Many mornings after: Campus sexual assault and feminist politics. Family Relations, 66, 17-28.

23.

Harding

(1993). Rethinking standpoint epistemology: What is “strong objectivity”? In Alcoff

Potter

(Eds.), Feminist epistemologies (pp. 49-82). New York, NY: Routledge.

24.

Harper

Maskaly

Kirkner

Lorenz

. (2017). “Enhancing Title IX due process standards in campus sexual assault adjudication: considering the roles of distributive, procedural, and restorative justice.” Journal of school violence, 16, 302-316.

25.

Henrick

(2013). A hostile environment for student defendants: Title IX and sexual assault on college campuses. Northern Kentucky Law Review. Retrieved from https://ssrn.com/abstract=2126340

26.

Houston

(2014). How feminist theory became (criminal) law: Tracing the path to mandatory criminal intervention in domestic violence cases. Michigan Journal of Gender & Law, 21, 217-272.

27.

Incite! Critical Resistance Statement. (2005). Gender violence and the prison industrial complex: Interpersonal and state violence against women of color. In Sokoloff

N. J.

(Ed.), Domestic violence at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender and culture (pp. 102-114). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

28.

Kaminer

(2014, November 19). New factor in campus sexual assault cases: Counsel for the accused. The New York Times. Retrieved from https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/20/nyregion/new-factor-in-campus-sexual-assault-cases-counsel-for-the-accused.html?_r=0

29.

Kim

M. E.

(2013). Challenging the pursuit of criminalisation in an era of mass incarceration: The limitations of social work responses to domestic violence in the USA. British Journal of Social Work, 43, 1276-1293.

30.

Konradi

(2017). Can justice be served on campus? An examination of due process and victim protection policies in the campus adjudication of sexual assault in Maryland. Humanity & Society, 41, 373-404.

31.

Koss

M. P.

Wilgus

J. K.

Williamsen

K. M.

(2014). Campus sexual misconduct: Restorative justice approaches to enhance compliance with Title IX guidance. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 15, 242-257.

32.

Lombardi

(2017). The college judicial system leaves rape victims feeling victimized again. In Schmermund

(Ed.), Campus sexual violence (pp. 115-133). New York, NY: Greenhaven Publishing.

33.

Lonsway

K. A.

Archambault

(2008). Advocates and law enforcement: Oil and water. Sexual Assault Report, 11(6), 81-82.

34.

Loschiavo

Waller

(n.d.). The preponderance of evidence standard: Use in higher education campus conduct processes. Association for Student Conduct Administration. Retrieved from http://www.theasca.org/files/The%20Preponderance%20of%20Evidence%20Standard.pdf

35.

Martin

P. Y.

(2005). Rape work: Victims, gender, and emotions in organization and community context. New York, NY: Routledge.

36.

Martin

P. Y.

(2016). The rape prone culture of academic contexts of fraternities and athletics. Gender & Society, 30, 30-43.

37.

Miller

(2001). The paradox of women arrested for domestic violence: Criminal justice professionals and service providers respond. Violence Against Women, 7, 1339-1376.

38.

Moylan

C. A.

(2017). “I fear I’m a checkbox”: College and university victim advocates’ perspectives of campus rape reforms. Violence Against Women, 23, 1122-1139.

39.

Nichols

A. J.

(2011). Gendered organizations: Challenges for domestic violence victim advocates and feminist advocacy. Feminist Criminology, 6, 111-131.

40.

Nichols

A. J.

(2013a). Meaning-making and domestic violence victim advocacy: An examination of feminist identities, ideologies, and practices. Feminist Criminology, 8, 177-201.

41.

Nichols

A. J.

(2013b). Survivor-defined practices to mitigate revictimization of battered women in the protective order process. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 28, 1403-1423.

42.

Patton

M. P.

(2015). Qualitative research and evaluation methods: Integrating theory and practice (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.

43.

Richards

T. M.

Branch

K. A.

Fleury-Steiner

R. E.

Kafonek

(2017). A feminist analysis of campus sexual assault policies: Results from a national sample. Family Relations, 66, 104-115.

44.

Richie

B. E.

(2000). A Black feminist reflection on the antiviolence movement. Signs, 25, 1133-1137.

45.

Rosenfeld

(2017, August 28). Why it’s harder for African American women to report campus sexual assaults, even at mostly black schools. The Los Angeles Times. Retrieved from http://www.latimes.com/politics/la-na-pol-black-women-sexual-assault-20170828-story.html

46.

Silverglate

Gewolb

(2014). FIRE’s guide to due process and campus justice. Philadelphia, PA: Foundation for Individual Rights in Education. Retrieved from https://d28htnjz2elwuj.cloudfront.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/07013435/FIRE-2015-Guide-to-Due-Process-3.pdf

47.

Smith

(2005). Looking to the future: Domestic violence, women of color, the state, and social change. In Sokoloff

N. J.

(Ed.), Domestic violence at the margins: Readings on race, class, gender and culture (pp. 416-434). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

48.

Smith

(2003). Sociology from women’s experience: A reaffirmation. In Kivisto

(Ed.), Social theory: Roots and branches (pp. 360-370). Los Angeles, CA: Roxbury Publishing.

49.

Sokolow

B. A.

Schuster

S. K.

Lewis

W. S.

Swinton

D. C.

(2016). Complying with Title IX by unifying all civil rights-based policies and procedures. In Wotten

S. C.

Mitchell

R. W.

(Eds.), The crisis of campus sexual violence: Critical perspectives on prevention and response (pp. 113-124). New York, NY: Routledge.

50.

Stark

(2005). Reconsidering state intervention in domestic violence cases. Social Policy and Society, 5, 149-159.

51.

Triplett

M. R.

(2012). Sexual assault on college campuses: Seeking the appropriate balance between due process and victim protection. Duke Law Journal, 62, 487-527.

52.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2011, April 4). “Dear colleague” letter guidance, supplementing the OCR’s revised sexual harassment guidance). Retrieved from http://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/letters/colleague-201104.html

53.

U.S. Department of Education, Office for Civil Rights. (2014, April 29). Questions and answers on Title IX and sexual violence. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/about/offices/list/ocr/docs/qa-201404-title-ix.pdf

54.

Walsh

W. A.

Banyard

V. L.

Moynihan

M. M.

Ward

Cohn

E. S.

(2010). Disclosure and service use on a college campus after an unwanted sexual experience. Journal of Trauma & Dissociation, 11, 134-151.

55.

Websdale

Johnson

. (2005). Reducing woman battering: The role of structural approaches. In Sokoloff

NJ.

(Ed.), Domestic Violence at the Margins: Readings on Race, Class, Gender and Culture (pp. 389-415). New Brunswick, NJ: Rutgers University Press.

56.

White House Task Force to Protect Students from Sexual Assault. (2014). Not alone. Retrieved from https://www.notalone.gov/assets/report.pdf

57.

Wood

Sulley

Kammer-Kerwick

Follingstad

Busch-Armendariz

. (2017). “Climate surveys: An inventory of understanding sexual assault and other crimes of interpersonal violence at institutions of higher education.” Violence against women, 23, 1249-1267.

58.

Wooten

S. C.

(2016). Heterosexist discourses: How feminist theory shaped campus sexual violence policy. In Wooten

S. C.

Mitchell

R. W.

(Eds.), The crisis of campus sexual violence: Critical perspectives on prevention and response (pp. 33-51). New York, NY: Routledge.

59.

Young

(2017). The accused are denied due process in campus sexual assaults. In Schmermund

(Ed.), Campus sexual violence (pp. 77-84). New York, NY: Greenhaven Publishing.

60.

Zweig

J. M.

Burt

M. R.

(2007). Predicting women’s perceptions of domestic violence and sexual assault agency helpfulness: What matters to program clients? Violence Against Women, 13, 1149-1178.