News

‘Deal with the Devil’: Harvard Medical School Faculty Grapple with Increased Industry Research Funding

News

As Dean Long’s Departure Looms, Harvard President Garber To Appoint Interim HGSE Dean

News

Harvard Students Rally in Solidarity with Pro-Palestine MIT Encampment Amid National Campus Turmoil

News

Attorneys Present Closing Arguments in Wrongful Death Trial Against CAMHS Employee

News

Harvard President Garber Declines To Rule Out Police Response To Campus Protests

Don't Open Floodgates

DISSENT:

By Mark J. Sneider

While we share the staff's concern about acquaintance rape, we must voice our objections to their endorsement of such a board, ambiguous definition of the crime with little regard for the implications such a definition may hold.

By supplying such an expansive definition of acquaintance rape--one which differs from Massachusetts state law--the undergraduate Council has allowed the subversion of justice to a minority of feminists seeking to promote their own radical agenda.

Declaring categorically that a "victim" may be in such a psychological state as to be unable to say "no" sets the stage for the potential opening of the floodgates of accusations. And once the charge of acquaintance rape has been made--no matter what the verdict of the Board or the court is---the defendant is marked for life.

What, we ask, could constitute such a psychological state that so impairs the vocal chords as to prevent them from emitting a one syllable word? Inebriation? if a person is drunk, he or she may not say "no" to sex and then regret that decision once sober, one could argue. Is this rape? Whatever happened to maintaining control over bodies? Should drunk drivers be acquitted because they weren't sober at the accident? Can "victims" be so released from any and all responsibility? We think not, and we find it remarkable that so-called proponents of women's rights would have such little faith in a woman's ability to say "no."

A definition of rape cannot be so nebulous as to give "victims" virtually unlimited authority to cry "rape" after the fact when they didn't at least verbally object at the time (expect, of course, in those cases where the victim is physically prevented from speaking by the rapist, where the threat of violence is imminent of where the victim is incapable of exercising his or her vocal chords due to some medical condition like laryngeal cancer or laryngitis).

If we open the floodgates, we are setting up a whole new group of people as potential victims. Only then, they'll be called defendants.

Want to keep up with breaking news? Subscribe to our email newsletter.

Tags