Consent: John Doe's Case At Georgia Tech

Cases in which the truth will never seem to arise that appear complicated can have devastating effects on a person’s educational career. One example would be John Doe’s Case at Georgia Tech, in which charges and biased investigations were imposed upon him after an alleged sexual misconduct. “A Georgia Tech student expelled in April after a sexual misconduct investigation has filed a lawsuit alleging that the review was unfair and violated his rights. The lawsuit said the university’s Office of Student Integrity found the student, identified as “John Doe” in the suit, responsible for non-consensual sexual and intercourse and coercion against a female student at an October 2013 event where they had been drinking. Doe received little information
University administrators need to redefine codes in a less broader interpretation as a way to not have much power on students. By defining a crime so widely, administrators will find it much easier to declare students guilty even with the slightest suspicion. Author Lukianoff mentions one of the most famous sexual misconduct policy that was passed in the 1990s at Antioch College in Ohio, “Consent: Consent is defined as the act of willingly and verbally agreeing to engage in specific sexual conduct” (125). The term consent simply means to give permission or agreement for something to happen, and that is exactly what the speech code in Antioch College is looking for. Consent is needed for many things in our lives, but when it comes to asking for it within any sexual or even human interaction, it is absolutely absurd. In most sexual assault cases, consent is never something the victim is asked for, much less will it be asked for when a guy is trying to give his girlfriend a kiss, hug, or even a simple compliment. Cathy Young’s campus rape article on TIME closely examines the way some states are implementing the “affirmative consent” in universities as a measure to prevent sexual violence on campus. “The campus crusade against rape has achieved a major victory in California with the passage of a so-called “Yes means yes” law. Unanimously approved by the state Senate yesterday after a 52-16 vote in the assembly on Monday, SB967 requires colleges and universities to evaluate disciplinary charges of sexual assault under an “affirmative consent” standard as a condition of qualifying for state funds” (Young). Students under this standard are required to say yes as a way to demonstrate that they