: How the Politicization of Campus Sexual Violence Fuels Risks and Danger of Scholarly Work

• In Event: Research Dangerously: A Scholarship of Consequence and Pushing Barriers in Educational Research and Praxis

Abstract

Purpose: Conversations about sexual violence on colleges campuses have moved toward the forefront of U.S. collective consciousness over the last decade. The 2011 Dear Colleague Letter (DCL; Ali, 2011) invigorated mainstream conversations about what institutions are required to do, including staff positions, implementing policies, and developing educational programming and training (Ali, 2011; White House Task Force, 2014). And though this seems like common sense to many—we should be working to eliminate the issue of sexual violence and addressing the harm caused to survivors and campus communities—this work has become extremely politicized. The politicization of this issue creates several challenges, roadblocks, and, at times, personal and professional risks for those who engage in work focused on addressing sexual violence.

Framework: Institutional betrayal has been used as a framework to understand the ways institutions’ actions or inactions betray sexual violence survivors and cause them further harm (Smith & Freyd, 2014). This framework moves from individual to institutional/systemic analysis of betrayal and trauma. I use this framework to reflect on the ways institutions contribute to the risk and dangers of engaging in scholarly work focused on campus sexual violence.

Modes of Inquiry: I utilize scholarly personal narrative (SPN) to “use personal insights gained in order to draw larger conclusions … to challenge and reconstruct older political or educational narratives” (Nash & Viray, 2013a, p. 4). SPN allows scholars, particularly those from marginalized identities, to draw from personal experienced to make connections to broader contexts (Nash & Vijay, 2013b). I draw from my own experience and past research to articulate the risks of engaging in scholarship on campus sexual violence.

Point of View: Because of the nature of the U.S. political system—anything deemed political is also deemed divisive. And because of fears of “cancel culture,” being divisive is to be avoided. Further, because the issue of campus sexual violence has been politicized, any work in this area is deemed as activism, which is perceived as personal rather than professional work. In turn, engaging in this work is less likely to be supported or rewarded by institutions (Hurtado, 2021). And, engaging in this work publicly (via Twitter or op-eds) opens the doors for personal attacks. In this symposium, I intend to expand on the ways in which engaging in this type of politically “divisive” work is risky and dangerous both personally and professionally.

Significance: Conversations about the dangers of engaging in scholarship and service related to campus sexual violence are deeply necessary. We cannot expect to work toward eliminating this pervasive issue from our campuses if those doing the work are silenced or removed from our institutions. Institutions, professional organizations, and other scholarly communities should be supporting this type of work and leading these conversations with the public. This would mean a move from institutional betrayal to a commitment to institutional courage (Center for Institutional Courage, 2021).

Author

• Sarah S Hurtado, University of Denver