SLASHING RAPES AT GWU

Perhaps of equal importance - why doesn't George Washington University [GWU] do more to prevent rapes before the occur. More specifically, why don't they use the only program which has proven to actual be effective, and which can reduce campus rapes by almost 50%. Here's what I wrote about it.

A careful study of the problem has shown that no university anti-rape program - presuming including those here at
GWU such as those urging bystander intervention, Zeta Beta Tau’s red-light green-light game, etc. - are actually effective.

However, careful scientific study has shown that only one anti-rape program is effective, and that this one program can actually reduce the incidence of rape among entering female students by almost 50%, a truly remarkable
achievement.

So, while I would urge students to get and use the new cell phone app, I think it is at least as important that GWU
consider using (or at least testing) a program which has a remarkable and proven record of success and effectiveness, and not rely upon those which might may be nothing more than feel-good ineffective measures.
Here’s more information.

HERE'S WHAT WE KNOW CAN SLASH CAMPUS RAPES ALMOST 50%

Despite extensive publicity about various strategies to reduce campus date rapes - such as mandating "yes means yes," a preponderance of evidence standard, encouraging bystander intervention, and others - only one has been scientifically proven to slash BY ALMOST 50% the incidence of campus date rapes among incoming women.

As reported in the New England Journal of Medicine, a highly respected peer-reviewed publication:

"In this randomized, controlled trial, the risk of completed rape (the primary outcome) was significantly lower over a period of 1 year among first-year university women who participated in a sexual assault resistance program than among those who were provided access to brochures on sexual assault. THESE RESULTS CONTRAST WITH PREVIOUS REPORTS OF THE LIMITED EFFECTIVENESS OF OTHER INTERVENTIONS FOR WOMEN. .. The 1-year risk of completed rape was significantly lower in the resistance group than in the control group." [emphasis added]

Indeed, THE PERCENTAGE OF RAPES WAS SLASHED BY ALMOST 50% [5.2% COMPARED TO 9.8%].

The program, according to U.S. News, "aimed at teaching women how to recognize dangerous situations and resist sexual coercion . . . The 12-hour resistance program, conducted in four sessions, taught women how to effectively assess the risk of sexual assault by men they knew, recognize the danger in coercive situations, get past emotional
roadblocks to resist unwanted sexual behaviors and practice verbally resisting the behavior or actions."

There was also a small self defense component, but the report did not suggest that any of the female subjects had used force to try to defend themselves.

Instead, as the authors themselves noted, the emphasis was on “verbally resisting.” It appears, therefore ,that the women in large part simply learned how to say - or perhaps even shout - "NO" earlier and more effectively.

This is reinforced by the study's author, psychologist Charlene Y. Senn, who said that the program "may have increased women’s ability to detect and interrupt men’s behavior at an early stage."

She also explained that “my idea is that the more confident and sure women are of what they desire, and what they want, the easier it is to say, ‘No, I’m not doing that’ — and there wouldn’t be that prolonged pressure that results in sexual assault or clearly unwanted sex.”

SEEP EXPLAINED THAT MOST WOMEN, FACED WITH UNWANTED SEXUAL ADVANCES BY PEOPLE THEY KNOW, TRY PLEADING AND CRYING, INSTEAD OF VOICING A VERY FIRM AND UNEQUIVOCAL “NO,” OR EVEN SCREAMING IF NECESSARY.

Sending signals which aren’t clear, and therefore might seem ambiguous - especially if both the male and female have been drinking heavily (which is usually the situation) - in many cases simply may not be very effective, as the study suggests.

Indeed, the study strongly suggests that a clear loud - and screamed if necessary - “NO” or “STOP” or "DON'T" apparently is far more effective, especially if uttered before penetration is attempted, than vague protestations
like “I don’t feel right about this,” or “shouldn’t we wait.”

Interestingly, in many of the rape complaints which have been challenged in court, one or more people were nearby - in some cases, even in the same room - who presumably would have intervened at least verbally had the female
complainant simply said or screened “NO” forcefully..

So, if GWU's
Sexual Assault Response Consultative team, the Committee on Sexual
Assault Prevention and Response, groups like Students Against Sexual
Assault, Rory Muhammad (Title IX Coordinator), and Carrie Ross
(assistant director for sexual assault training and response) want to be
effective in truly reducing campus rapes, something like this proven
and effective program should at very least be tried here.

If the
incidence of rapes is anywhere near as high as many claim, we should
have statistically significant results showing which programs are
effective and which programs are not very shortly.

Public Interest Law Professor John Banzhaf;
see also, Law Professor's Proposal for Reporting Sexual Violence Funded in Virginia, The Hatchet [1/31/16]