CAMPUS LISTENING SESSION – February 13, 2017
Summary of Notes
Question 1: Introduce yourself to the table and in one word, describe how you are feeling tonight.
NOTE: Not all tables reported/shared feelings.
Feelings Shared: Angry (3), Annoyed (2), Anxious, Apprehensive (2), Ashamed, Betrayed, Concerned (2), Conflicted, Confused (6), Conflicted, Curious (3), Determined, Disappointed (7),
Disgusted, Doubtful, Dubious, Emotional, Encouraged (2), Exasperated, Frustrated (7), Heavy-hearted, Hopeful (5), Interested, Intrigued, Inquisitive, Lucky, Motivated, Nervous, Overwhelmed
(3), Open (3), Optimistic (2), Pissed, Proud (2), Ready, Sad (3), Skeptical, Supportive, Tired (2), Uneasy, Upset (2)
Question 2: What are the most important components of a safe campus?
Recurring Themes/Concerns
 Protect all students

Identifying Predatory Behavior

Identifying Predatory Behavior

Clear Instructions on Steps to Report

Trust campus as a whole
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Protect all persons involved in the situation
 Promised safe space; doesn’t feel safe anymore.
 Conversation feels one-sided. A lot of women present; doesn’t just affect women.
 Administrators caring more about student safety than their image; need to report sexual assault honestly
 Not being afraid of harm
 Student support
 I DO NOT CARE how good at sports some is, how high their academic standing is, or if they’re an RA, EVERYONE is held accountable
 It’s important to address this topic for freshman students, in particular who can the University convince that students are vulnerable,
but there is no reason to be afraid?
 It’s important to address it for freshman, in particular how can the University convince that students are vulnerable, but there is no
reason to be afraid, therefore, there should be systems in place to remove the threatening “object.”
 Is the first step to contact authorities? Do we contact police? NO. VIP confidential advocate vs. man reporter.
 Explained Lauren’s services.
 Works at hospital, all mandatory reporters. Thinks we should require all employees to tell the police; group discussion on why they
disagree; gives autonomy to survivor.
 Cases of rape claims need to be taken very seriously; more often than no, there is truth behind it.
 How does university
 Confused; because I trust students and administration wants everyone to be on same playing field. Both parties need to connect.
Page 1
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Timely and Open Communications
About Campus Incidences and Policies
to Community

Having good resources, policies and
advocates for victims
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
Wants to understand move.
 Campus culture at Creighton is a good culture; need knowledge on how to be safe. Awesome to see people caring.
 There’s a need to reassess trust
 Respecting one another
 Looking out for one another
 Trusted authority
 We don’t trust OEI/Public Safety/CSI
 Why should we have faith in CU if they handle things this way?
 Why should we trust the process? How can we trust Creighton to help us if they are sweeping it under the rug
 Need more trust
 Promoting through campus organizations through all levels of the university.
 There should be more of an emphasis on a person’s ability to cause harm to someone; rather than just emphasis on the victim
 Lack of communication leads to assumptions
 Always felt CU was safe, but hard to think there is a division between campus policies; foreign feeling lately; disconnect between CU
students’ experience
 Notify students sooner if situations on campus; students feel like they are left in the dark about situations (small and big); utilization of
an app with notifications (students can receive notices before news articles come out); more holistic perspective on updates
 The delay in reporting or information being offered to students needs to be changed because students feel they aren’t being informed
promptly
 Request for more details in the report
 Conflicted and feels all of this is connected to fraternity issue. Stuff being swept under the rug.
 Totally open communication
 Need honest communication on what really happens
 Who receives the CU Alerts and Campus Crime Bulletin e-mails from the President?
 Making it clear to people that advocates are available
 Having someone represent you that you trust; good representative/advocate for someone to process with after experiences
 Unsure if a student would be protected/supported by those in power
 Advocate someone who is with victims continually to tell story repeatedly so victims never feel alone
 Regardless of action taken, victim should always feel safe and that should be a priority of the university
Page 2
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Follow through with students voicing
concerns (2)

More transparency (8)
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Approachable departments so students feel heard and safe
 Allies are key component. Feels administration does not act as an ally. Work how to enable voices to be heard.
 Actively promoting people to act in ways to prevent incidents from happening; proactively encouraging safe behavior.
 Holding everyone accountable; we ALL need to take care of the people we care about. Eventually the message will be sent; “this will
not be accepted.” Opening the discussion creates an open and loving campus environment. Being present, having the confidence to
intervene.
 Assertiveness training: being clear about boundaries, etc.; challenges gender norms as far as disposition goes.
 Organizations should be proactive
 Consistent support system; well-trained staff
 Administration that cares more about victim than image
 Policy on no action taken against the victim’s personal record for speaking out about the incident; nothing on their record
 Protection of students and potential victims
 Policies to protect students
 What to do if a friend is a victim; training and guidelines?
 More comprehensive training on how to help victims
 Students need to be educated; who to go to; how to get voices heard
 Student voices are not being heard
 Students having a voice
 Understanding that the university cannot disclose everything, but should still readily disclose what they can
 No secret process
 There should be no gray area (2)
 Give solid explanations for any and all cases and for any ruling.
 Give solid information concerning number of cases on campus; we only see the very small number of confined cases
 Report sexual misconduct in campus crime; the stabbing was reported, the flashers were reported; report warnings (not necessarily all
information) about rape/sexual assault
 Feels like we are sweeping issues under the rug
 A lot of gray; one shoe won’t fill all; want actions to narrow that down; shoulder shrug response in gray areas – it’s hard so it will go on
the back burner
 Why does it feel like Creighton is trying to cover it up?
Page 3
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Language and policies to be clear
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Is Creighton’s reputation more important than our Jesuit values (i.e., Men and Women for/with Others)?
 Is the faculty upset/uncomfortable/educated on this?
 Students need to be better informed! It will stop rumors/transparency.
 The sinister nature of “keeping it quiet,” only telling a few people. “The culture of silence”, bringing this to the table reveals the
humanity of the student’s body; people are here because they care, but they don’t know exactly what they can do.
 Safe campus=transparency, no band aids, work at the root issues. It should not happen anywhere.
 Need open communication during investigation process; let people know what they need to do to make sure the process works;
publish OEI process
 CU does list reports of sexual assault, stalking, etc. on website; but a lot of people don’t know about that; we still need to be
transparent and direct in order to combat the problem
 How do we prevent “sweeping under rug?” No matter who you are, you must be held accountable
 Transparency within all parties – well-informed group while maintaining privacy
 Why is the university image more important?
 Concern for institution above people/students
 Transparency/access to information
 No general stats, stats for our campus; explain what happened, don’t name names
 Simply more transparency
 The need for the implementation of policies
 How does it work?
 Are there checks/balances that the system is working?
 Who is looking out for our well-being?
 Follow-up on all situations
 Education on policy; understanding terms by seeing written documents rather than just a metaphor like Cheez-its (too light-hearted)
(2)
 What exactly are the policies and procedures?
 Policies aren’t wrong; people just don’t know them.
 Seems like it leaves door open to have things get lost in translation. Maybe how bad decisions get made by administration. Think you
misunderstand role of confidential advocate. Helps someone go through process and get help.
 Implement rules or take them out.
Page 4
Recurring Themes/Concerns
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Can’t find policy; that’s a problem. Should be able to Google and find easily.
 Word in policy; mutually understand words or actions. Cannot have consensual action; can conflict; mutually is vague and doesn’t
mean anything.
 Good that it says silence and passivity doesn’t equal consent.
 Cheez-Its need to be more education on consent. Don’t want to scare them, but they need to understand. (3)
 Disconnect between policy being carried out
 Clarity of policies
 Talk about consent as seriously as they do about alcohol (is Cheez-It’s the best option for Welcome Week presentation?); trying to
bring it to the level of students, but it has become trivialized on campus; definitely had good intention (3)
 A better policy could bring more people forward; bring victims forward because they know people will be held accountable
 A better policy could bring more people forward; bring victims forward because they know people will be held accountable.
 Faith in institution/policy there to protect you and people there
 Effective response
 Ability to change policy efficiently
 Alcohol is taken seriously, while sexual assault doesn’t seem to be during Welcome Week
 There is a lot of gray area in the language used to identify sexual harassment, assault; language needs to be clear, direct, and
comprehensible; we are encouraged to report, but then nothing happens when you do.
 We can’t promote consensual sex as a Catholic university; so it’s hard to confront
 Policies about safety need to be followed and enforced
 Words have a lot of power; word usage in crime bulletins
 Do we have an in-depth understanding of policies? Are we avoiding reactionary policies and closely examining the definitions of each
policy?
 The people who the policies affect are not happy with the policies, so why aren’t they changing it? The administration thinks the
policies are okay, but the policies don’t even affect them, so why is nothing changing?
 Be open; use terms, not politically correct “sexual misconduct”
 Put more responsibility on men to respect women, rather than blame the victim for dress/alcohol use
 If you sexually assault someone on campus, you should NOT be allowed on campus
 The policies sound good, but it’s in application they are flawed. But we can’t talk about specific cases where the OEI and Creighton as
an institution have failed us
 Policy should include the consequences for a student who commits sexual violence; to keep consequences consistent and to further
Page 5
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Education of students
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
discourage students from committing such crimes. Students need to know that sexual violence will not be tolerated and that violating
the University’s policy will have consequences
 Personally doesn’t think policies are wrong. Thinks education around policies is wrong; need to talk more about consent. Even if we
change to yes means yes, we still have to talk about consent and sex.
 Cheez-Its are worthless; we’re adults, so talk about consent in a mature way! (6)
 The need for this education to be continuous; not just during the first week of school
 Not always the lady’s fault
 Continued education for freshman students; education throughout the semester; not just a Welcome Week Skit
 Every student on campus should be exposed to obligatory training on sexual misconduct: undergraduate, graduate, etc.; incorporate it
into training prior to freshman year
 Talk about sex and consent. We are adults. University of Minnesota example has “yes means yes”, thinks it should be “yes means yes”
on Creighton’s campus. This is where frustration and confusion come from
 Party Smart is a helpful tool/training for students (i.e., buddy system, voice of reason, trusted friends)
 Green Dot is outdated; revamp
 Inform people about: passive bystander (how not to be one, or to recognize when you are being one and stop it); calling it out; “peer
allies.” Outline the scenarios in which you can step in and do something
 Culture of bystander intervention
 Offer continued sexual assault/consent education periodically; students change so much after freshman year, some of us have just
educated ourselves
 CU Survival took good strides this year with the spoken word; should continue
 Play into Greek Life; maybe add to Being a New Greek (BANG)
 Green Dot Certification (2)
 Engage the students in a variety of avenues (orgs, classes, Welcome Week)
 The “Tea Video” provides a good image of the spectrum of levels of consent (even if you’re in a relationship with someone, sexual
assault can still happen).
 Provide education beyond Welcome Week
 What is the best route to educating others in terms of sexual assault/consent?
 More education on statistics of sexual assault; more awareness of situations/warning signs; it is usually someone you know and trust
 RAs should do more programs; make it very close and personal; it might be taken more seriously
 Education from outside the university (external support/objective source)
Page 6
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Lack of Security Cameras

Strong Public Safety presence on
campus (5)

Ensure processes are unbiased and
fair
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 It’s okay to talk about these topics
 Updated Green Dot training; how do we help someone (including ourselves!) who has been the victim of sexual violence? Should focus
on not only prevent but on how to handle such situations when they do occur
 Lacking security cameras, especially in hallways of the residence halls; reduce things even like theft; identifying the attacker
 Without security cameras, there is a lack of evidence; you’d think people would take your word, but maybe you need simple things like
cameras, especially in the cases of he said/she said
 Presence with security guards
 Making sure Public Safety is doing what they are supposed to do along with all safety organizations.
 More qualified public safety officers; less focus on traffic tickets
 Availability of Public Safety is important for support
 Focus on safety rather than crime stats on campus
 Public Safety clarity in policy; Public Safety should be more thoroughly spread out (e.g., officer under bridge)
 More respect for Public Safety vs. Police being a go-to.
 Maybe a phone app option to get Public Safety attention immediately
 If we are honest about what’s happening, we can CHANGE the culture; we don’t trust Public Safety; if I need help will they be there
timely and keep me safe?
 Public safety: disappointed, not timely, not reliable enough, discussed but not visualized/present.
 Provide a safe environment
 Public safety provides a culture of safety; students want to be safe, act safely
 Safety Reports: if there is a “suspicious black male”, this is reported to the campus community, but we don’t hear about reports of
rape. We must understand that there is confidentiality and the accused also has rights. Disappointed to find out that an incident
happened so long ago.
 Feeling safe walking at night; not always being on guard
 Campus just doesn’t feel safe anymore
 Public Safety improvements
 If you report it to Public Safety, do they report it to the police?
 Need to apply Jesuit values to cases like this
 Other institutions seem more trusting of students; no assuming; non-biased
 Jesuit values are important; practice what we preach; values should be lived holistically
Page 7
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Self-Defense Training (3)

Abstinence

More Dialogue
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 This place has Jesuit values supposedly, but they totally have swept all this under the rug; if it doesn’t pain Creighton in a good light,
they (institution) hide it
 Is Creighton’s reputation more important than our Jesuit values? (Men and Women for and With Others)
 How can we assure confidence in the system? People involved in an incident need to both be “interviewed” listened to and not
interrogated/non-biased working with victims.
 Hold all students to same standard.
 Consistent upholding code of ethics
 How can we put campus back to what we “thought” it was? How can we hold higher-ups to Jesuit values?
 Protecting the image is too important for administration over holding responsible for your actions. Everyone should be held
accountable; better if everything is reported and addressed than denied.
 Values aren’t real. What does Creighton actually care about?
 Bias perspective from internal affairs/should not all be about protecting our image, but about protecting our students
 Tie to Jesuit values; people should actually know and live out these values; not everyone is on same page with Jesuit values; how does
this apply to sexual assault and consent?
 At Jesuit school, we should be held to higher standards. Walk around safety at all times.
 There are 2 sides of every story and people do lie so we do have to be careful
 How does university decide in he said/she said cases?
 How do we remain unbiased while maintaining privacy? How do we support transparency while also supporting privacy?
 Consistency of decisions
 Training of students, situational and physical
 RSP class devoted to self-defense
 Taking self-defense more seriously
 How does Creighton feel about this topic?
 CU needs to take action
 Only one sentence in handbook
 BS/doesn’t work but modern institution needs to realize sex happens on campus
 Not forced to be abstinent
 More “outlets” for people who have been affected
 More details to explain rationale about outcomes; only to people involved
Page 8
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Prevention/Be proactive

Enhance Counseling services

Communicate with students’ families

Safe Culture (3)

VIP Center
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Law School and professional schools want to be more connected; need to open up line of communication to include these schools.
 Schedule a follow-up forum to the listening session ASAP
 It’s sad that it takes a crisis moment to make this conversation happen
 Stop being so reactionary; be more seriously proactive
 CU is reactionary NOT proactive – only action that takes place is due to CU’s name “looking bad”
 Be bold; say what we said we would in our message, “Set the World on Fire”; are these only buzz words with no action?
 What should motivate people to hold the standard? Being able to recognize it for what it is, calling it out; “I would hate to have to tell
someone about an experience I had and not have them recognize what it was.”
 Proactive is greater than reactive (2)
 Punishment over prevention: how can we educate for prevention? We spend a lot of time trying to prevent alcohol abuse. Transfer
students have participated in 6 hour course of sexual misconduct, Title IX, etc., even before arriving on campus and part II completed
in October to reflect on first few months of college experience.
 Make counseling more available
 Get rid of negative stigma behind counseling
 Bigger Counseling Center staff; counseling and health are essential
 Notify parents ASAP (i.e., follow-up e-mail)
 Getting family input
 Multiple sides to every story; whether action taken or not, everyone should feel safe
 Overall feeling of safety
 Safe culture needs communication. Law School feels so far off campus, need to be proactive and not reactionary.
 You never think it’s going to happen at Creighton, but we need to be realistic
 Outreach from faculty/staff equals a good thing
 Ensuring safety: a new housing situation maybe?
 Safety concerns: assailant continuing to live in above room
 We should feel safe on this campus; we hold high standards as a Jesuit university; we are predominantly female campus
 We are in a city, but we are safe, but in fact we are not; a lot of it comes from within our campus
 More blue lights
 Availability of VIP Center is important for support
 VIP Center is important, in case NR process makes you feel like your experience is wrong.
Page 9
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Continued Education

Good rapport between students,
faculty and staff
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 What are the educational levels of VIP Center
 Awesome resource; not pervasive enough, not their fault; our problem is definition and policy on consent
 Advocacy for victims; what is the VIP Center doing? Can they take action against OEI?
 Need more opportunities to continue learning after freshman year; not just seek them out on our own.
 More education on policy and what to do (Green Dot)
 A gendered seminar at the start of the year identifying consent, privilege.
 Required Green Dot training
 Continued education of students on this topic
 If people were introduced to people who are providing safety – VIP, Public Safety, Counseling, and others who provide resources and
to build relationship with students as early as Welcome Week
Question 3: What do you think everyone in the Creighton community should know about sexual assault and
consent?
Recurring Themes/Concerns
 People enforcing policies need to be
fully informed about the definitions
and what it can consist of/how it
occurred.

Welcome Week Training

No means no; yes means yes (8)
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Clear cut definitions of sexual assault and consent
 Teaching to recognize signs of sexual assault
 Bring in professionals to talk about how to facilitate conversations
 “Ignorance of the law” is not an excuse; needs to be added to the policy in some way
 Rules are in place for protective reasons; they should follow them
 Creighton has a consent policy, but they don’t follow it; silence does not equal consent
 Implementation of a new way for Welcome Week and new Student Orientation to inform students about sexual assault and consent
(2)
 Make the presentation personal; CU will take action; students need to know that; University passivity makes people feel unsafe
 Need to be educated by the OEI: even RAs want more education about it; no one understands the Green Dot Program
 We should address root cause not just after policy: more than just Welcome Week discussion; beyond “Cheez-It” metaphor
 Talk about it; use drinking education module for new students; should include a sex education module for new students as well.
Donors?
 Not fighting back doesn’t mean yes, just as big of a deal as physical assault
Page 10
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Amnesty Rules
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 The concept of consent has been disregarded
 Change to yes means yes seminar
 Be proactive to teach what the words “yes” and “no” consist of in terms of actions
 No means no, but so does passiveness
 Actively saying yes, not just assumed
 Yes only means yes. VERBALLY
 What is implied consent?
 CSU working on changing from “mutually understandable” to “affirmative” consent; makes it easier to apply to cases; less murky
 Consent can’t be assured
 What does Yes constitution; not serious enough; it’s a real issue; should equate consent education on same level as alcohol education
during Welcome Week; students should know consequences/protocols like CSI and OEI processes like we know CARE and PEAC
resources,; should have all-campus inclusive training yearly (maybe Welcome Week and on-line)
 What is consent? Yes vs. no: ambiguous/vague.
 What is protocol; what are policies?
 No means no – yes means yes – important
 Processes should be transparent/explicit; training for OEI and Title 9 Office needs to be clear/structured.
 “Effective consent” needs to be switched to “affirmative consent” – only “Yes” means “yes” (when you’re cognizant)
 Affirmative consent policy; yes means yes
 Yes means yes consent should be explicitly stated
 Better education on signs of non-consent instead of just no
 Provide actual definition of consent
 Consent should never be interpreted; consent must be ongoing
 Silence is not consent, ever.
 Don’t make it negative; tell people how they can clearly communicate consent (or not)
 Rape is never the victim’s fault
 A person should not be penalized by CSI (or any other group) if you are reporting; how will students ever feel safe in reporting if they
were involved in other activities? (i.e., drugs/alcohol)
 Is amnesty policy inclusive when it can be abused across departments?
 Amnesty policies/implementation; should not fear reprisal
Page 11
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Rape culture still exists

Understand drug and alcohol and the
relationship to consent



Not tolerated on campus
Traumatic impact on students
Roles of the OEI Office and VIP Center

Use RSP for Education on Sexual
Assault

Assault can happen to anyone
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Good Samaritan Law – not always followed; needs to be clear
 Why is the amnesty policy so vague? Why does the policy not stay absolute in all cases? Why is it being presented in one way now, but
talked about differently during Welcome Week?
 Some people honestly do not know they are doing anything wrong due to lack of education.
 You never think it’s going to happen at Creighton, but we need to be realistic
 Admitting it is a lot more prevalent than we admit
 Addressing why rape culture is so present at this university
 Rape can happen between people who know each other
 People assume it’s never going to happen to them until it does
 Freely, sober-minded saying yes
 Drinking should mean no consent can be given
 Alcohol on campus and in sexual assault; we need specific policies regarding sexual assault where alcohol is involved
 In the recent campus messages, there was no regard for future incidents by stating that “it is not tolerated.”
 We handle visible trauma and pain differently than sexual assault and the emotional pain that has on women and men
 Students need to learn more about the OEI office and the role they play
 Understanding the difference between the VIP office and OEI
 VIP Center and available resources are important
 Talk about it at a different time than Welcome Week; it should be a conversation in RSP
 Open ground in RSP class
 Day-to-day events discussed in RSP
 Maybe RSP provides a session on the topic; in a smaller setting
 RSP class curriculum on consent
 Incorporate this talk into RSP rather than one presentation during Welcome Week
 Consent/sexual assault education should be taught in RSP classes, not huge lectures
 Develop a consent course to be part of RSP
 Assault can happen after you turn 21
 Not just women as victims; all inclusive, not gender-biased
 Why are more men not here; men’s education
 Anyone can be a victim
Page 12
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Inform students where help for these
situations is after graduation
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 This is not just a woman’s issue

Question 4: What questions do you have about sexual assault, campus policies or topics that we have not touched
upon tonight?
Recurring Themes/Concerns
 How is the University going to define
consent? (3)

Policies and Procedures
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Anything other than yes means no.
 Definition of consent seems to get skewed; what is the definition?
 Policy on consent=passive consent; should restructure policy and language; how do investigators know what really happened?
 May never have a perfect policy; how do we draw the line of community knowing too much?
 We want to acknowledge this is happening all over; this is an opportunity for Creighton to take a step forward and create a more
affirmative consent policy (2)
 Consent not properly given and then an action happens, the victims have confidence to report
 If everyone has the same definition of consent, we have the same shared norms and we confront these situations in the same way
 Is consent in the university policy? Effective vs. affirmative consent; most Jesuit institutions have affirmative.
 How does university handle situation regardless of policy? Process needs change?
 New consent policies; no ambiguity; what evidence is needed?
 How should consent be framed and taught?
 Policy of consent: if there is a “no”, this needs to be upheld and policies have too much gray area to be interpreted. There needs to be
objective policies of what happens to the perpetrator – banning on campus?
 More education on consent
 Trying to understand how the university can make the victim be in trouble; what about an amnesty policy?
 How will policies change?
 Why doesn’t Creighton call the police? (2)
 Policy is written for “loop holes.”
 Policy is not adequate; yes means yes
 We are all confused on how the policy/laws work, a/k/a this is a problem!
Page 13
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Increase Awareness of Sexual Assault
Issue and Reporting Process
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Like to see students hold university (worried about their image) responsible beyond this listening session; enact new policy
 How does the university plan to enforce these rules and regulations to keep student, staff and faculty safe?
 How can one person break the curfew law?
 Easier access to the policies/procedures
 What are the charges/costs for a rape kit? Use of rape kit possible?
 Put more emphasis on what students can do
 Policy should address difference between sexual and physical assault.
 Why is Greek system held to double standard where sororities are so closely regulated and fraternities aren’t?
 Why is first policy not to involve authorities but just to keep it in the university?
 Physical we do, but not sexual.
 Reported vs. addressed sexual assault.
 Policy should reflect the law
 Don’t know CU’s policies; so hard to find/difficult
 Legal action: what is police jurisdiction on crimes on campus?
 Clear concise definition of consent
 Require faculty training
 We want to acknowledge this is happening all over; this is an opportunity for Creighton to take a step forward and create a more
affirmative consent policy
 This stuff happens way too often
 Knowing where to go for the resources
 Understanding where sexual assault falls on the priority list of issues (vs. cheating)
 Transparency in numbers/statistics
 Physically present for training rather than a mandated computer training session;
 Each semester a new speaker or event that is a requirement once a semester. Threaten grades or credit if not in attendance.
 What do we do when we have no witnesses? How much does a rape kit do to help? What if he says she did consent? We feel like the
worst has to happen to get a rape conviction (bruises, etc.)
 Clear we aren’t taking sexual assault seriously
 What to do if you are put in this situation; what happens if you say no and that doesn’t help?
 Higher pressure on do not rape instead of do not get raped
Page 14
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Why don’t people report?

Why is policy change not completed?


Trauma Class
Committee on Sexual Assault

Investigation/Ruling Processes
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Is there training that tells men not to sexually assault?
 Information on process for victims
 A “What to Do Next” web page
 Shaming of persons going public with their experiences.
 People are afraid to report if their attackers were a member Creighton Athletics and/or the Greek community
 Why does it take trauma to have policy change?
 Administration is putting on a show; so “f__ing” worried about their image
 Sociology, anthropology, HAP departments are sick of doing nothing
 If there’s no policy change, what will be different?
 Trauma class should be required; RSP is unstructured
 Committees are formed to address issues; but these committees have not been held responsible for results
 A committee could be useful due to different interpretations
 Committee on sexual assault – who is on it? Will they challenge cases?
 More diversity and accurate student body representation within committees with students, faculty, staff and administration.
 In the ruling of sexual assault cases, how is a decision made and what determines who the university will side with in the case of a man
assaulting a woman?
 Shouldn’t Creighton always report the incidents to the police?
 Many cases have been reported, what has changed?
 What do I do if this happens to me? Maybe clarify this; first steps you shouldn’t take…; Good Samaritan rules if some is drinking/has
boy in room after hours can they have safety to report?
 Consequences are applied asymmetrically
 Why is everything so ambiguous? How are these actions reflective of our Jesuit values? How do you support your students?
 Why are the non-sexual assault vs. sexual assault cases handled so differently?
 Why does the process differ so greatly case to case?
 Policy on paper vs. implementation
 Policies are inadequate/unclear
 How is the decision-making process conducted?
 Double standards for men/women on campus and in organizations
 Are cases heard by one person or a committee? If by one person, why? How do you appeal?
Page 15
Recurring Themes/Concerns

Ongoing Dialogue on Topic

Theological Impact
Student Comments Relating to Fr.
Hendrickson
Student Comments Relating to Cassie’s Blog
Student Comments Relating to Stabbing
Incident
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Policy changes in regards to reporting need to be done
 A panel of someone who has experienced this so people can understand “why she didn’t do something”
 Important to continue conversations on this topic
 Action sessions need to occur; greater importance than listening sessions
 A safe environment with open conversations
 Conversations like this tonight promote healthy conversations and a safe place; moving beyond surface level conversations and
converse about these critical issues
 Why did it take so much for “change”/listening sessions to happen?
 What role could deeper understanding of theological concepts have in this? How far can you go with this topic to help without
hurting?
 Where is Fr. Hendrickson?
 Fr. Hendrickson should be here tonight
 Why was Fr. Hendrickson not here?
 That guy should not be an RA, why is he?
 The administration, the office are good people, so why the heck does this happen? Why did that girl not get enough support? Why did
they let that guy remain an RA?
 There should be more males here
 If due process kept this guy from getting in trouble, change the process/definition of consent to get at someone who did something
wrong; while still protecting the innocent; we know this is a complex paradox
 Why was the man let back in the dorm? Especially as an advocate for freshman students?
 It feels like Gallagher is trying to hide what they know behind desserts and therapy dogs. They should have been there for all residents
more immediately
 Should have told all of Gallagher once kid was apprehended.
 Biggest point: BE THERE FOR THE RESIDENTS ASAP. COMMUNICATE ASAP.
 Don’t be passive about opening up help, go to the residents individually, and sit in the lobby to talk.
 Train people for this kind of crisis.
 Why can’t RAs react when there are police?
 It’s so terrifying that this was a student who lived in the building.
 Should send residents an immediate notification when there’s a safety issue.
Page 16
Recurring Themes/Concerns
Campus Listening Session
February 13, 2017
Student Comments/Recommendations/Questions
 Immediate help = immediate safety
Page 17