Last Tuesday inside University Hall, while students protested outside in the Rally for Justice, Faculty members debated the case of D. Drew Douglas, Class of 2000 and then, by an overwhelming margin, voted to dismiss him for rape as the Administrative Board had recommended. It was the right choice given the options. The case gathered considerable media attention focusing both on students' calls for greater support for rape victims and on the varying accounts of the situation which led to Douglas' criminal conviction on a charge of sexual assault as well as the Ad Board's decision that a rape had occurred. In the wake of the Faculty's decision and the media storm, we are left with a good deal to consider, not least of which is the meaning of rape on this campus and the appropriate punishment for that crime.

While a Boston Blobe story left open the possibility that the events of April 4 were consensual, the court statements to which Douglas pled guilty depict a situation in which the women he assaulted repeatedly his advances. But faculty members proposing a lesser punishment for Douglas wrote in a letter to the Crimson that "Rape is not an undifferentiable single act. Rather it is a category of acts that vary dramatically in their causes and consequences...it is easy to imagine rapes that warrant the most severe penalty we can confer, if not more, It is our belief that this space dies not fall in that category."

It is important to note that the Faculty members proposed the alternate punishment based mainly ion sealed statement from ad board proceedings which we cannot see. It is therefore difficulty to address the reasons for their proposal specifically, but it is worth analyzing the problem of the "varying categories of rape" raised by this case. (A discussion what the Ad Board's role should be-if any-in handling cases of violent crime is best saved for another day).

Yes, there are different categories of rape, including stranger rape, acquaintance rape and date rape. Situations can vary, as can the relationship between the attacker and the attacked, but they fundamental act of rape-forcing someone to have sex against their will-remains the same and should be punished severely. Rape is not a lesser crime if it is committed by a friends or acquaintance or if the person raped has been drinking. To attempt to distinguish degrees of punishment according to the context surrounding the rape diminishes the idea that rape itself, no matter the context, is a physically and psychologically destructive act committed against an individual.

Harvard is right to have a strict policy against sexual assault and rape in its Standards of Conduct for students: "Rape includes any act of sexual intercourse that takes place against a person's will or that is accompanied by physical coercion or the threat of bodily injury. Unwillingness may be expressed verbally of physically. Rape may also include intercourse unwillingness or its prevented from resisting as a result of conditions including, but not limited to, those caused by the intake of alcohol or drug," The College however must clarity its position punishment for the act of rape; administrators insist that for all intents and purpose "dismissal" is the most serve punishment possible-and we fell that rape warrants that serve punishment. As long as "expulsion" remains on the books as an option, however confusion and frustration will linger.

Meanwhile it is the Faculty's responsibility to hear and vote whatever cases of this sort remain outstanding as a sign of the University's commitment to disciplining acts of sexual violence. The community should focus on discussion, education and prevention.

Tangibly as the Coalition Against Sexual Violence has pointed out, the College must guidelines for Sexual assault violence. In addition, question about sexual violence should be included on first-year and senior year surveys.