Search for: All records

Colleges and universities are legally required to attempt to prevent and redress sexual violations on campus. Neo-institutional theory suggests that the implementation of law by compliance professionals rarely achieves law’s goals. It is critical in claims-based systems that those who are potential claimants understand the law. This article demonstrates that (a) intended subjects of the law (colleges and universities) interpret and frame the law in very similar ways; (b) resultant policies are complex and difficult to navigate; and (c) university undergraduates in an experimental setting are not able to comprehend the Title IX policies designed to protect them. These findings suggest that current implementations of Title IX policies leave them structurally ineffective to combat sexual assaults on campus. 

Greek life in American colleges and universities is characterized by white hetero-masculine dominance. A large scholarship has documented Greek life’s association with women’s sexual violence, yet much less is known about how men—who are ostensibly privileged in these settings—experience sexual harassment and assault. Using 15 interviews with fraternity members attending an elite, midwestern university, we examine men’s experiences of intra-fraternal sexual violence. We describe fraternity members creating and deploying a white hetero-masculine discourse of “brotherhood” that institutionalizes intra-fraternal sexual violence, makes it illegible, and gives its perpetrators impunity. We also show how the brotherhood discourse differentially deploys resources and power to fraternity brothers based on their intersectional location and relationship to intra-fraternal sexual violence. Future applications of the brotherhood discourse in fraternities and other institutional contexts can help us better understand how such organizations reinscribe intersectional power hierarchies.