Setting the Standard

The definition which formed the focal point of the debate roughly parrots Massachusetts state law. The broad Task Force definition which raised eyebrows in suggesting Harvard students should be held to a higher standard than the law was branded by Jewett as "either impractical or inappropriate as a disciplinary standard."

The compromise definition favors the Undergraduate Council interpretation, because it requires an expression of the victim's will. The burden for this expression lies with the victim.

The Undergraduate Council definition, sponsored by then-Vice Chair Malcolm A. Heinicke '93 and approved last May, proposed a definition of rape as sex "that occurs despite the expressed unwillingness of the victim." The Civil Liberties Union of Harvard (CLUH), which has been involved in Jewett's efforts to demystify the Ad Board, supported the council definition.

The Task Force report released in February 1992 originally presented a broad definition of date rape as sex occurring "without the expressed consent of the victim." The Radcliffe Union of Students and The Crimson endorsed the definition.

The Task Force was initially charged to suggest date rape procedures required by federal law as well as education and counseling measures at the College. It also proposed "peer dispute subcommittees" that include students to hear disciplinary cases involving date rape. The report also called for a wide-ranging campaign to educate the campus community about the problem of date rape.

While its education and counseling recommendations were readily accepted by the College administration and students alike, the Task Force's definition of date rape and the suggested student participation in disciplinary cases--both rejected by the Ad Board--have drawn the most publicity.

The purpose of formulating a coherent definition of date rape, Jewett says, has been to give special recognition to the issue of date rape--and to adhere to federal law.

In the past, sexual assault has been treated under the broader category of violent crimes, says newly appointed Assistant Dean for Co-Education Virginia L. MacKay-Smith '78, who succeeded Viggiani last month. "Unfortunately in the past we dealt with date rape like other issues of physical violence," she said.

Policy-Making or Appeasement?

Beneath the debate over definitions and procedures lie a number of questions about how the College administration and Jewett in particular have gone about cobbling together a new policy to handle date rape cases.

First of all, why was the Date Rape Task Force created? And why was the composition of its student membership drawn largely from RUS?

Jewett created the Task Force under pressure from angry women's rights advocates who charged him with insensitivity, sparked fiery criticism from the Cambridge City Council and carried out an angry monologue against him in the campus media.

Jewett said last week that the main significance of the Task Force was to convey student attitudes to the administration, but at the same time conceded that the Task Force was not representative of the entire campus.

The question arises then: Why was a representative body not set up from the Harvard community?