I read the policy and it doesn’t seem too bad.
http://www.thefire.org/index.php/article/11723.html
The part about “real or perceived differentials in power may create an atmosphere of unintentional coercion” is not part of the definition of sexual misconduct, but rather part of the statement of principles.
Also, I would think this would refer to teacher/student, coach/athlete or other such relationships, where one party has power over the other intimidation might be used to get “consent”, not to the ridiculous NCAA basketball champion scenario, put forth in the article. No reaasonable person would conclude that a star athlete has the power to compel every woman on campus to have sex with him.
At any rate Duke is a private university and can make its own rules. Nobody has a “right” to attend Duke or any other private school. If Duke wanted to ban all sexual activity on campus, it would have every right to do so.
No; it must follow state, federal, and Constitutional law just like the rest of us. For example, Duke cannot make rules that place unreasonable restrictions on speech, personal associations, etc.
Wow. You might want to familiarize yourself with the outrageous and illegal behavior of Duke faculty and staff during the whole Duke Lax case. Perhaps then you might recognize that a) they (the powers that be at Duke) still do not understand the meaning of innocent, b) they are still convinced that a rape did occur, and c) they repeatedly failed to follow their own guidelines set forth in the Student Handbook to protect the falsely accused students. So what exactly makes you think that this power differential they speak of will NOT apply to those who are perceived to hold power, even if they aren’t in “official” positions of power? They certainly perceived the falsely accused Duke Lax players as powerful. After all, power, money, whiteness, and elitism were the overriding themes in the reactions of many Duke faculty and staff. Why would it be any different now?
There should be heterosexual guys in next year’s freshman class at Duke (and for years thereafter). After several years, there would be no heterosexual guys left at Duke.
Two of the ‘perceived’ differentials in power that liberals believe and have been used often in their arguments are power differential in gender (they don’t believe the term ‘sex’ when it comes to social issue) and race.
So, as a principle (since it’s part of the statement of principles), male gender and white race are seen as more powerful than any other groups. It means that any accusation brought by black female against white male would be deemed enough to be used against the white male, regardless of the fact.
So if Duke wanted to make a rule excluding all African Americans or make a rule that required homosexuals be immediately expelled or that did not allow any leftists to attend that would be ok? This “make its own rules” nonsense only applies if it fits the leftist agenda. Universities must comply with all kinds of government laws and regulations.
That is why Hillsdale College refuses to accept Federal Funding.