The Undergraduate Council's date rape subcommittee yesterday debated the definition of rape given by the Date Rape Task Force's report last month.

Meeting for the second time to recommend a council response to the report, the six-member subcommittee split on the report's definition of rape.

The Task Force, formed in 1990 in response to student concerns about the College's treatment of date rape, defined rape as a sexual act without the "reasoned consent" of both partners.

The subcommittee came to a consensus in its first meeting last week to reshape what they called this "radical redefinition of rape," but some said yesterday that they believed they might have dismissed it too hastily.

Residential Committee Co-Chair Maya G. Prabhu '94 said "We need serious, animated discussion to what extent Harvard can legislate behavior and what standards of behavior are viable inthe Harvard community."

Prabhu and Effie K. Anagnostopoulos '92 pointedout problems of miscommunication may arise withoutone party's explicitly denying consent.

"I was concerned about the first date out,where there's not been a precedent,"Anagnostopoulos said. "For some reason, a womanmay be in a position where she doesn't feelcomfortable saying no."

But Council Vice Chair Malcolm A. Heinicke '93argued that it is unfair for the task force todefine rape as any form of sex without the consentof both parties.

"It places all the burden on the man [to askfor consent]," Heinicke said.

Heinicke said the task force's definition ofrape imposes a moral bias unacceptable in a legaldocument.

"It's not good to try to change people's moraland behavioral problems with an overly inclusivelaw," Heinicke said.

The subcommittee agreed on recommendations toimplement mandatory date rape workshops forfirst-year students and to change the University'spolicy on sending date rape cases to theAdministrative Board.

"Workshops should be part of the freshmanexperience," Prabhu said.

Individuals charged with rape should not beforced to leave the University unless they proveto be a security threat, the subcommitteeconcluded.

By the plan put forward in the Task Forcereport, individuals charged with rape who refusedto co-operate with the Administrative Board wouldbe forced to take a leave of absence.

Subcommittee members expressed concern thatinformation from Ad Board proceedings could laterbe used against students in criminal proceedings.

Daniel H. Tabak '92 said that for a respondentto have to University and criminal proceedingssimultaneously would result in an unacceptablesituation of "double jeopardy."

The subcommittee has not yet discussed the TaskForce's proposal of including two students on eachof a number of Peer Dispute Subcommittees thatwould evaluate specific cases.

Heinicke, however, said he had written up amodified proposal in which the identities of thecomplainant and respondent would not be revealedto the other students.

The subcommittee's deliberations will bepresented to the full council for debate on April12