We may live in a culture that still pays more for brawn than brain…but I think it IS reasonable to ask our universities to do otherwise.
Yes, non-student athletes are also capable of this type of behavior, but there have been studies that find that male athletes in “power sports” commit sexual and domestic assault at a rate much higher than others–all while (many times) being protected by the University systems. We aren’t doing anyone any favors by pretending this isn’t the case.
As far as Chris Boyd…yes, he was dismissed from the team, but he was allowed to keep his academic scholarship. Do you really think a random student who made the same choices would have remained on scholarship at the University? Let’s review his choices–according to the court testimony he didn’t just “move the woman”. He a) first received texts/pictures/video of the other players sodomizing the unconscious women with a bottle b) helped cover it up by moving the half-naked, unconscious woman into a dorm room and c) sent texts later to the others involved telling them that he didn’t think she was aware anything had happened. He also sent texts instructing those involved to delete any videos/texts, keep their mouths shut, and to tell their room mates to keep their mouths shut as well.
Do you really think if these were just some random guys in a dorm no one would speak up? There is definitely a sub-culture of athletes that are not shocked and appalled by these actions.
Again, I am not singling Vandy out as there have been so many cases of this type of abuse that I could probably list at least 10 off the top of my head (Notre Dame had a high level one a few years ago where the woman was told “don’t mess with Notre Dame Football”).
Sexual assault at Universities continue to be a large problem. Can they occur with non-athletes? Sure and unfortunately they do. But if evidence suggests it is happening at a higher rate among male athletes, why not begin to address the problem at that level?
bjdkin- I don’t condone Boyd’s actions at all. However, he was charged but had not been convicted and the university could not do anything more than what it did. Without a conviction for a felony, he gets to remain on campus and keep his scholarship. The same would be true for any other student. It turned out he pled to a misdemeanor, so he got to stay.
Thanks for the clarification MomofWildChild. But wasn’t Chris Boyd on an athletic scholarship…and suspended from the team in August, prior to the school year starting? (He wasn’t a Cornelius scholar or something like that, right?). How did he maintain his athletic scholarship? I thought those were revoked if a player no longer plays for the team.
Many athletic scholarships have conditions such that the athlete doesn’t lose the scholarship except in certain circumstances. I know athletes who have gotten injuries preventing them from playing and they keep the scholarship. Depends on the terms.
kelsmom…it is not about which individuals you or I know or don’t know, or about citing anecdotes. Proves nothing. There is abundant evidence to support my original premise, but you don’t have to agree at all.
OP–I agree, outstanding response from Chancellor Zeppos!
oliver007–in the last 2 weeks alone in my local newspaper, I have read stories of rapes allegedly occurring on campus or just off-campus at 3 different nearby universities (elite Duke University being one) involving, not “practically illiterate and unteachable” recruited athletes, but fraternity members. Following your logic, I should conclude that all fraternity brothers “have a propensity for deviant behaviour while in college”; maybe the admissions offices should scrutinize the applications more closely for those male students who indicate an interest in joining Greek life.
On a more serious note, college campuses seem to be over-run with students who do not exercise sound, moral judgement but I don’t know how an admissions officer can determine from a paper application which potential students (who look outstanding on paper and have strong recommendations from teachers/counselors/coaches/local alumni interviewers) are likely to ‘go off the rails’ when they leave their home environment. It is a difficult issue.
Oliver–even if I concede that some recruited college athletes do not belong on elite college campuses (and would not be there if they were not athletes) they are not the only ones on campus committing rape, what about the ‘frat boys’ who were legitimately admitted on merit to Duke, UVA, Dartmouth to mention just a few elite universities currently dealing with rape allegations?
I have a son who is ready to go college next year. Even though I believe we raised him to be a responsible young man, I am afraid for him. The culture of where the students go (athletes and non-athletes alike) makes a big difference in how they behave. Institutional culture does matter and that is why the focus is on the institutions.
I commend Vanderbilt for the immediate action they took, but I believe there is more it could do and could have done. As the chancellor said, I was more perturbed by the bystanders who did nothing. This needs to change.
There is a documentary coming out soon (I believe in March) called “The Hunting Ground”. It will talk about rape on campus. It was just shown at the Sundance Film Festival.
Rice…thanks. No secret that misconduct is committed by other than athletes. I am puzzled why post after post points out that non-athletes commit rapes too. I am well aware of that. I do believe that in some instances athletes are singularly unfit to be on academic campuses, and that some schools look past this in favour of having them there to strengthen athletic programs. I think this is hypocritical as it endangers other students. Some of these athletes are also an affront to the very concept of education, since they have scant interest or aptitude for that. One of the gentlemen scholars accused in the current case at VU delivered himself of this during a police interview: “We was like brothers. I didn’t want nothing bad to happen to nobody…” I don’t know about you, but it made me shudder. I realize my view may be against the grain in a society where the greatest sin may be to hold anyone to any standard at all.
Here is the point Oliver. We agree that sexual misconduct is not limited to athletes. It is also proven that in general Athletes are no more sexually violent than Frats. Given that, the only point left is whether schools should give preferential treatment in admissions to athletes. I have no arguments for or against that and it is completely besides the point of discussion.
Actually, the point was precisely that schools are sometimes willingly overlooking the danger signs about athletes and admitting them, thus jeopardizing other students. I believe there is a real issue there. And when you consider all schools, including the big football factories, the incidence of misconduct by athletes is higher than fraternities (serious, criminal misconduct, that is). I wrote in an earlier post about the fate of many athletes after college…that is a shocking profile, and I dare say that it has some manifestations while these guys are in college too. I personally believe colleges may in some cases have liability for the antics of some of these athletes…in the same way a person would have liability for, say, leaving a child unattended in the presence of a bad dog…but I am no lawyer. I am convinced that some colleges practice the art of supreme hypocrisy and cynicism in allowing some of these guys on to their campuses, to remain competitive is sports.
Oliver- I AM a lawyer and I am kindly suggesting that you are off the wall. I agree that a number of athletes have issues at college and a number of colleges don’t do what they should do when these issues arise. Some of this is due to the backgrounds of the athletes and some is due to a culture of entitlement and heaping praise and attention on 17 and 18 year old kids. It’s an issue. HOWEVER, the number of fine student athletes who develop into outstanding adults and are upstanding members of their college communities and cities greatly outweighs the ones who get into trouble. Might I also suggest that there is a lot more publicity around the activities of prominent college athletes than there is concerning a “regular” college student?
There was a time when no one ever dreamed that a drive in food place would be liable for excessively hot coffee that a client then spilled on themselves…legal realities are often defined anew when someone breaks with the status quo and challenges a counter party in court. I do not believe that this issue can be dismissed with a flourish of the hand. It would be interesting to see how a college would defend its decision to admit a particularly egregious and “red flag” type of an athlete (speaking in general now) if such a person fell waaay short of the espoused standards by such a college, and then proceeded to commit a crime against another student. If a willful disregard for the safety of the student body can be shown, there would be a precedent setting liability. I doubt that any such challenge in court would be easy, and in all likelihood, too intimidating for most people to undertake. My OP was really meant to exhort colleges to reexamine their values and priorities on this matter.
Oliver. Your arguments are all over the place. You cite statistics and when some one gives you a counter example, you say it is just one case, then blissfully take one case to make your point. You do have some valid points but there is no convincing you of anything other than what you already believe, no matter what!. I am also convinced that you are struggling with other issues that you just don’t want to voice. Good luck to you, Sir. This is the end of the conversation for me.
Oliver- I agree that talking to you is pointless. Go google “proximate cause”.
And if you knew anything about the McDonald’s hot coffee case (I have spoken to lawyer associations about the case) you would understand why McDonald’s lost and what the real issues were.
I have to “ditto” both Momof and rice…not important whether you see my point or not. It seems that you guys feel it is
pointless to have a conversation unless you prevail…or convert the other person to your view. We have different views. Leave it at that. “Proximate cause” is a concept known to not just lawyers, but MDs too in diagnosis. Thanks for the helpful pointer.
“Take one case to make a point”??? Can only be written by someone who failed to read or comprehend my earlier posts. Best to ignore Mom and Rice. Good day to both.
Alcorn State coach Jay Hopson told The Associated Press earlier Thursday that McKenzie was playing football for the Braves because he believes the freshman is “100 percent innocent” of the charges.