By: Anna Shamory Summarization
The deliberation, “Take Back Our Campus: Preventing Sexual Assault at Penn State,” centered on three approaches to reduce sexual assault on college campuses. The first approach discussed alcohol, and the fact that alcohol is a major factor in sexual assault by lowering ability to communicate consent and perceive sexual signals. My group discussed the need for better, increased education about alcohol and sexual assault. That Penn State needs to do more than one pre-freshman online program, and present it in a more open and engaging platform so it is more impactful. Additionally, we weighed the idea of fraternities being required to have a third-party bartender so drinks can be better monitored. We all agreed frats are a major problem with how they handle alcohol and in turn those who drink, leading to increased opportunity for sexual assault. In approach two, help available, the groups discussed Safe Walk, blue lights, and “angel shots.” We concluded that PSU’s Safe Walk program is ineffectual as it currently is, with understaffing making wait times dangerously high. One girl brought up the idea of an improved Safe Walk run with golf carts for faster times, increased availability, and less creepy than being followed back to a dorm. For blue lights, we discussed how Penn State lacks in this department, with only four around campus, and that they need to build more. And lastly for downtown State College, we conversed about the advantages of implementing “Angel shots” for women who need to get out of uncomfortable positions in bars. For the third approach, bystander intervention was examined as an effective way to prevent sexual assault by different ways of intervention. We reached a consensus that the buddy system and having a game plan beforehand with friends was important so people can watch out for each other. Also, bystander intervention training could help students feel more comfortable knowing how to intervene effectively in a situation going south. One girl came up with saying to someone in need of help, “Hey didn’t we have English 15 together?” to distract and get the girl away from the guy (or vice versa). Analysis/Reflection I learned from the moderators and deliberation how I can become a better moderator. The format of their approaches was to have all of the groups listen to a moderator about the short introductions in each approach, then go back to discussion in each group. The conversation was sometimes abruptly cut off with this type of format. As a moderator, I learned that keeping it in the small groups the whole time might be easier to transition between sections. One of the moderators in my group mentioned outside information on how she had called and asked around downtown about the “angel shots” idea. This fact positively impacted her ethos to me, and made me think she really cared about this deliberation topic. I learned that it would further me positively as a moderator to show in small ways how I care deeply about whatever topic I am covering. In regards to the key issues discussed during the deliberation, each was distinct on their own to generate separate but equally useful discussion. But at the same time, I felt the moderators left enough open reigns that participants could come up with unique ideas; for instance, when one woman brought up the problem of fraternity parties and their overall environment here at Penn State, during the third approach.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
Categories
All
|