Charlie Maxwell Hunting Ground Post

Charlie Maxwell

AP US Government, Period 3

Ms. Gordon

4/10/16

The Hunting Ground Blog Post

1. According to the film, sexual assault on college campuses is made almost entirely possible by alcohol consumption. Male students use this drug to take advantage of women at various social events. It has become so common, in my opinion, for two reasons. First, fraternities have grown immensely in size and influence, and they are one of the main locations of sexual assault. Second, assailants have very rarely been punished when compared to the number of incidents there actually were. If people are getting away with sexual assault with very little or no punishment, then the incentive not to commit such a crime decreases.
2. Legally, victims of sexual assault on college campuses are in a very tricky spot. Administrators at universities may want to seek justice for the victims, but their number one responsibility lies with the school--they must protect the school first. This is incredibly unethical and leads to the feelings of helplessness often felt by victims of sexual assault on college campuses. In the Jameis Winston case, for example, the victim sought attention from both the Tallahassee police and the support system created for these situations at her school. Neither institution made an effort toward justice.
3. When students try to enforce their rights, they are treated with hatred, accusations, and ignorance. Jameis Winston’s accuser, as an example once again, was essentially forced to leave Tallahassee because of the treatment she received from fellow students. The victims of sexual assault on college campuses are often questioned for the validity of their stories. Being under the influence of alcohol often distorts perception, and universities and students often make this claim about their peers who claim to be victims of such crimes.
4. Title IX states that no person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance. Title IX relates to this issue because of the threat to safety caused by sexual assault. If female students feel unsafe in their learning environment, then they are unable to access the benefits of the education programs they are in.  Furthermore, female students who seek refuge after their assault are often turned away without any assistance. In the film, female students repeatedly said that their was more support in place for the accused assailants (almost always men) then there was for the victims (almost always women).
5. In order to change this culture, I would start by altering the priorities of university administrators--by either getting rid of current administrators who have let this slide, or by making sure each of them knows that justice comes first, school second. Personally, one small thing I can do that might make an impact on those closest to me, is discourage my friends and peers from ever making jokes about rape or sexual assault. If I hear someone make this type of joke, I can explain to them how serious the issue is and hopefully illuminate the fact that sexual assault, especially on college campuses, is no joking matter.

Hunting Ground Blog Post Vivi

Vivi 

1. Why is there so much sexual assault happening on college or university campuses? Does the college itself have anything to do with it?

This is a really thought provoking question because it is a hard thing to explain. The reason that so much sexual assault is happening in these specific environments is due to a variety of factors. The first factor is that the perpetrators are young, naive, and a danger to themselves/others. They experiment with things, and most of those things are bad (drugs, alcohol, violence, assault etc). The second factor that plays into this is the idea that there is a culture around rape/sexual assault especially on college campuses that literally protects the person who has committed the crime more than the victim themselves. Colleges and universities in the united states have proven themselves time after time to turn a blind eye in order to maintain a high reputation rather than get justice for the victim. My opinion is that the college itself has virtually nothing to do with it because the problem of rape on college campuses is a reoccurring one in many different places that have nothing in common other than the fact that they are a university. 

2. What legal remedies are available to address college campus sexual assault? 

Civil lawsuits based on rapes is the most common legal remedy to address campus sexual assault. There is also financial compensation which can cover therapy or medical expenses that were a direct result of the assault. I personally do not think that the financial aspect helps victims at all because most of the damage that is inflicted during a sexual assault is mental. Yes it would help with therapy but most victims do not want money from their assailant- they want justice, and rightfully so considering how traumatizing an experience it is. I personally wish that there was more that could be done in the legal standpoint but the only thing that can be done is  file a lawsuit and see how far that goes, and more often than not the case even gets thrown out before it even gets read by a legitimate legal figure. 

3. What happens to students when they try to enforce their rights?

When students try to enforce their rights in a rape/sexual assault case on their campus, there is complete and utter backlash from the institution itself. A student will try and report (exercising their rights) and first, get victim blamed to the point where they might even convince themselves that it is their fault that they themselves got attacked. Then, a dean or a student advisor will tell them what it is they did wrong and what they can do differently in the future, and send the victim on his/her way. By doing this, institutions protect those assailants and disregard the victims and the cycle begins all over again, and leaves a  false pristine image for the university or college. 

4. What is title 9 and how does it apply to the issue of sexual assault on campus?

Title 9 is one of the most important legal bases of the United States Department of Education. It directly says “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving federal financial assistance.” Title 9 is the whole reason that the two main characters in the hunting ground could get their case off the ground by claiming a title 9 violation against the University of North Carolina- Chapel Hill, claiming that by being idle after reporting these attacks, it was inflicting upon their ability to get an education in a safe environment. Title 9 is the basis that everyone regardless of sex gets the same education IF it is federally funded, and by leaving the man that assaulted Anne on campus, it is inflicting upon her ability to get the same education as her assailant. The Title 9 complaint created a movement across the United States in colleges and universities in order to get them to actually get them to do something about their attacks. 

5. What would you do to change the culture? 

Rape culture is one that has been implemented long ago so reversing it deems itself nearly impossible. However, there is a way to start small. First, schools need to stop shying away at the subject as if it is taboo. It is not taboo and it happens every day and by educating young people it might lessen their chances of being an assailant. Schools also need to stop treating a woman’s body as a sexual object. Girls in public school are virtually banned from showing any skin because they claim that “it might distract the boys from learning”. My shoulder should not “distract” your student, and if it does, that individual has his own problems to figure out. Starting a conversation about assault and rape is the first step that can be taken in order to irrationalize rape culture, and we sure have a long way to go. 

Karin Komiyama
AP Gov
Period 3

The Hunting Ground

1. Sexual assault is so prevalent on college campuses because the school officials take no action against suspects. They protect their institution only, so victims have nowhere to fall back on for support. This creates an easy hunting ground for the rapists. Freshmen are especially vulnerable to sexual assault, and frat parties are one of the easiest places for assault to occur (alcohol flowing, drugs, etc).

2. Colleges are federally required to report all incidents of sexual assault on their campuses. However, the school officials (deans, professors, vice president, etc) usually sweep the claims under the rug to keep their crime stats low. Campus police hold the power in handling the case alongside the school. Title IX is available to students, but colleges completely disregard this right and often times retaliate against the victims that filed the claim.

3. When students try to enforce their rights, they get harassed. Like a survivor said in the video, her dorm room was broken into and vandalized. The school punishes them, or protects their attackers by enforcing no punishment. Also, the school could file suit against the survivors as retaliation.

4. Title IX is a gender equality law. It prohibits discrimination based on gender on all school based activities the receives federal funding . When women and men are sexually assaulted on campus and the school obtains knowledge of it,  the school is legally obligated to take actions, and it is unlawful for them to retaliate against the victims that filed the law suit. Not many sexual assault cases (especially from the video) followed Title IX.

5. I would organize a sexual assault survivors group. We would gather rallies weekly in front of frat houses or alleged suspect's home.

The Hunting Ground-Alex Moore

 Alex Moore

April 6th, 2016

Period 3

The Hunting Ground Blog Post

1. There is so much sexual assault happening on college/university campuses because universities have huge populations of students, some who are ruthless and vile human beings and others who are young,vulnerable, innocent students. Most sexual assaults happen at parties or in party atmospheres and that is the type of atmosphere most colleges have. Most assaults also take place when alcohol is involved. Assaulters take advantage of these situations and is absolutely awful.The college is supposed to provide safety when a child is at school. Colleges with very tight security might have less attacks. It is up to the University to provide a safe environment for their students to live in.
2. Assaulters can and should be arrested, but more often than not, they are let go. Assaulters who are in prison are sentenced to an average of 11 years, but often only serve half of their term. Universities have the ability to expel their students, but the majority of the time they choose not to because they want their tuition money. The girls in The Hunting Ground are working to file title nine lawsuits against universities because they are not being provided an equal safe learning environment.
3. When students try to enforce their rights while being assaulted, they are completely ignored. The attacker does not care at all what the victim has to say. The victims rights are completely taken from them. When the victim tries to enforce their rights when reporting an assault, they are often ignored. Universities do not want to report that an attack that took place on campus because then it would be public record and then they would lose future applicants because who would want to go to a school where many sexual assaults happen. No person should ever have their rights taken from them like this. Everyone should have the right to feel safe in the environment that they are in and it is a major problem that this is not the case. This needs to be fixed immediately, assaults need to stop.
4. Title IX states that “No person in the United States shall, on the basis of sex, be excluded from participation in, be denied the benefits of, or be subjected to discrimination under any education program or activity receiving Federal financial assistance”. What this means is that places that receive funds from the government, like universities and colleges, cannot be denied an equal opportunity at a program based on their gender. This directly relates to sexual assault on college campuses because girls and boys who are sexually assualted on campuses are not being provided an equal safe chance at schooling like others on campus are receiving. Someone who was attacked was not being protected equally and now cannot have an equal college experience. They, in most cases, have to go to school with their attackers. Some live in constant fear of another attack. Because these schools receive funds from the government, everyone should be able to have the same college experience.
5. It’s up to us to change the rape culture. We are the ones who need to stop it and make sure that future generations do not commit this awful offense. For starters, everyone needs to be on the same page that rape cannot be taking place. This is so wrong on so many levels, nothing is worth harming another person in this manner.It is so disgusting and heinous that people do this. Nobody should ever have to be a victim. We need to raise awareness about the issue. If we witness or hear about an assault taking place, we have to stop it. If we do not intervene, then that just creates another innocent victim and the assaulter will get away with it and think that it is ok. We need to stop blaming the victims. No matter what the victim was wearing, how much they had to drink, or how much they seemed interested, it is not the victims fault. They did not welcome the attack in any manner. If we continue to blame the victims, society as a whole will not see that the attackers are to blame. There MUST be better laws and consequences in place for rapists. They CANNOT continue to get away with this. They need to be imprisoned for a long period of time for this offense. If I had any say, it would be for life. Once people start being held accountable, we stop blaming the victims, and we take a stand, we can drastically change the rape epidemic.

Sex and Justice

Kawveh Alagheband

AP United States Government and Politics

Mrs. Gordon

March 2, 2016

Sex & Justice

1. Justice Clarence Thomas exclaims that this trial is a "high-tech lynching" and that the charges against him played into racist and bigoted stereotypes. What Thomas is trying to convey when he says "high-tech lynching" is that his reputation has been killed through these sexual allegations. Lynchings were actual murders against African American people, but the lynching he is referring to is of his reputation, saying that it is forever dead. He continuously referred to the trial to have a major aspect of racism and bigotry, even though both Hill and Thomas are African-American.  During Hill's questioning, she continuously brought specific events and facts of when she considered to be harassed. Some Senators, such as Specter, didn't take what she said into consideration but badgered her on facts and repeatedly questioned her morality as a woman and a legal professional. During Clarence Thomas' questioning, Specter made it very obvious whose side he was on  by literally believing every word that came out of Thomas' mouth. Specter even brought out a book that also a reference to "long-dong silver" that defeated the truthfulness of Hill's testimony. Thomas could only agree with his comments and when actually questioned about actual facts of the case, he continued to be on the defensive and "protect" his name against these allegations. He also brought up racial aspects of the trial, using buzz words and phrases like "high-tech lynching" in order to get attention as a victim and also to get a reaction that forces the Senators assessing this trial to refuse any aspect of bigotry because they were all white-males. Using this word got the Senators on his side using guilt which would definitely cause an inevitable win. The comments towards hill were overall biased against, almost as if Thomas had already won. I believe the fact that the committee came into the trial with a bias against Hill, she never had a very big chance to beat Thomas. 
2. The Red Scare hearings were held by Joseph McCarthy in the 1950's. Hollywood actors and personal were forced to testify that they were anti-communism and really just "true Americans". Until they did these testimonies, McCarthy and his administration jailed, fined and blacklisted from Hollywood. These actors that refused to go along with these lost all of their credibility that they had  gained while in "show-biz". The Thomas v. Hill case were very similar to the Red Scare cases because they were both highly publicized, but besides publication, there aren't many similarities. 

Sex & Justice Kenneth Martin

Kenneth Martin

AP US Government & Politics Period 3

Mrs. Gordon

March 7, 2016

1. A “high-tech lynching” is the idea that rather than actually killing Clarence Thomas like historical lynchings, the purpose of the hearings are to kill his reputation. According to Thomas, the allegations and hearings are racially motivated and use stereotypes of black men to harm his reputation, much in the same way that people used those stereotypes and accusations of sexual misconduct to justify killing black men. Prof. Hill, however, claimed she was simply trying to bring the truth to light and that she had nothing to gain by going through this highly publicized process. Contrary to Thomas’ claim about a “high-tech lynching”, the congressional committee was much kinder to him than to Prof. Hill, who sat through hours of intense and often ridiculous questioning, while during Clarence Thomas’ hearing there seemed to be very little opposition to his claims. A large majority of the comments during the hearings were heavily biased in favor of Thomas. The committee’s handling of the hearings certainly affected the outcome of their findings, which unfairly dismissed Anita Hill’s claims.
2. In the 1950’s the Red Scare was in full swing and Sen. Joseph McCarthy was a leading figure in it. During this time, a number of hearings and investigations into a perceived Communist threat were held. The many people accused of being Communists were deprived of their First and Fifth Amendment rights and their careers and reputations were ruined. The McCarthy hearings and the treatment of Clarence Thomas by the Senate Judiciary Committee were similar in that they were highly publicized, but the similarities end there. Unlike the victims of accusations by McCarthy and other anti-Communists, Thomas was treated fairly well by the committee and by the public. In addition, most of the claims against people accused of being Communists were false or highly exaggerated, while in my opinion the allegations against Clarence Thomas are likely to be true.

Sex and Justice -- Jordi Amaral

Jordi Amaral

AP Gov. and Politics

Gordon

3/3/16

Clarence Thomas used the term "high-tech lynching" in order to portray himself as a victim of society as opposed to the perpetrator of a heinous crime.  By saying the trial was a “high-tech lynching,” Thomas is comparing the racist, public murders of black men that were often due to accusations of sexual misconduct, to the very public and televised tarnishing of his reputation through the trial. Anita Hill gave the senators a very descriptive and clear explanation of the actions of Thomas, however these were received by Thomas, and many in the committee to be false and used in order to prevent Thomas from being on the Supreme Court. Thus, they questioned her in an extremely inappropriate manner that in most normal trials would lead to a contempt of court violation. When Thomas was questioned, some of the Senators would refer back to Hill’s testimony in a derogatory way, attempting to lead Thomas to certain answers that would make Hill look bad. I wholeheartedly believe that if the lines of questioning like that were to have been quelled, then we would not have Clarence Thomas on the Supreme Court today.

During the 1950s, the Red Scare was sweeping the nation as the Soviet Union and communism started to gain a power that rivaled that of the USA and democracy. The fear of communism led to actions reminiscent of the Salem Witch Trial, much like the Communist hearings held by Wisconsin Senator Joseph McCarthy in 1950. In my personal opinion the cases do not appear connected or are all that similar. However, two facets to either case need to be addressed when comparing them. For one, the key difference is in the evidence used in the respective allegations. In 1950, people were put on the stand simply to point other people out and apply blame to others. In 1991, however, Anita Hill had a clear and precise list of evidence against Clarence Thomas. The real similarity lying between the two cases comes when one looks at the end product of the cases, Both cases led to the ruining of reputations and led the nation to have bad feelings about what went down.