Our Blog

Fall is officially here. Move-in excitement has faded and midterms are winding down.

The danger of sexual assault on college campus is at its yearly peak.

Often referred to as “The Red Zone,” college campuses see over 50% of their reported sexual assaults occur between move-in and Thanksgiving Break.

These are just the assaults that have been reported. According to Know Your IX, only 12% of college student survivors report sexual assault to police. These numbers change based on demographics: for example, students who identify as LGBTQ and students of color are even less likely to report or seek campus services after experiencing sexual violence.

But to understand why sexual violence is so hard to track across college campuses, we must first break down our understanding of consent and university culture.

While living on a college campus, students learn to navigate shared spaces: common rooms, massive lecture halls, coed bathrooms. As a result, students primarily live out of their bedrooms. While this reality is challenging for a number of reasons–such as maintaining school-life balance–it can also lead to violations in students’ sexual lives, particularly concerning consent.

In their book Sexual Citizens: A Landmark Study of Sex, Power, and Assault on Campus, Jennifer S. Hirsch and Shamus Khan address this very issue.

Throughout the study, Hirsch and Khan utilize the term “sexual geographies.” This term was coined to help us understand the spaces through which college students move. As they note, “Access to space, and control over who can and cannot enter that space is a critical way power works. And power is critical for understanding assault.” To clarify this point, they give the example of how the standard college dorm room creates an unbalanced power dynamic.

Picture this scenario: a romantic interest asks you to come over and hang out. You walk into their dorm room, and there are two feasible places to sit: their desk feels too formal. Sitting on their bed, however, feels like an invitation to physical intimacy that you may not be ready for.

The geography of the situation creates an imbalance: the person who enters the space and sits on the bed is the more vulnerable party. The person who lives in the dorm room controls the space, making them more at ease. Therefore, the person who lives in the dorm room has more power in the situation.

Sitting on someone’s bed does not equal consenting to physical acts of intimacy. However, the geography of the space facilitates escalation. If the pair wants to kiss, they are automatically kissing in bed. This act is far more intimate than other first kiss situations. And because this interaction is already occurring in a bed, it can easily lead to sexual activities that may not have been agreed upon.

The person entering the dorm room faces a certain pressure tied to expectations deeply embedded in our culture. These expectations dictate how we should act when invited back to a person’s bedroom. Kissing someone in their bed is coupled with the expectation for sex. Oftentimes, this expectation isn’t communicated; rather, it is wordlessly expected. The person entering the dorm room, then, may feel pressured to go along with sexual activities to avoid hurting feelings, to avoid awkward situations, to avoid feeling guilty for leaving the bed without “putting out.” Though these expectations may seem old-fashioned, they are still highly prevalent in today’s dating culture.

However, going along with sexual activities that you aren’t comfortable with or feel pressured to do is not the same as explicitly and enthusiastically consenting. Expectations can–and should–be named. They must be discussed. Communicating expectations and checking in with the person you’re engaging in sexual activity with is the only way to navigate sexual situations healthily and respectfully. Absent of these conversations, someone may use the geography of the dorm room to gain access to a person, to cross boundaries and do whatever necessary–whether that be ignoring cues or using coercion, manipulation, or force–to make their expectations a reality.

To be clear: consent is present when both parties mutually agree on the activity. This mutuality must be free from intimidation, manipulation, and coercion. (We at SAVA consistently repeat this adage, originally said by Britta Davis, a Victim Witness Specialist with the Fort Collins Police Department: “When fear is in the room, consent can’t be.”) In a consensual situation, both parties know exactly what they’re getting into and feel comfortable enough to speak up when they don’t want to continue.

In the above example, the vulnerable party may leave feeling violated and may not recognize what they have experienced as sexual violence.  As a result, they may keep this violation to themselves.

However, just because a situation might not appear to cross legal lines, that should not invalidate the survivor’s feelings. This example is just one of many instances where consent is commonly wrongly assumed or simply not acquired. It is also an example of why sexual violence is so hard to track across a geography that reinforces imbalanced power dynamics.

Consent is easy to gain. Gaining consent can be as simple as asking, “Is this ok?”

It can be as straightforward as saying, “How far do you want to go?”

“What do you like?”

“Does this feel good?”

As long as it is acquired without coercion, consent can be gained using whatever words you’re comfortable using.

Without open and honest conversation around consent, boundaries are crossed. Violations occur. While we should always be having ongoing conversations about consent with our sexual partners, it’s just as important to have these conversations outside of intimate situations. Cultural expectations like those discussed above are a big reason why prevention education is crucial to ending sexual violence. Prevention education will not only help people learn how to ask for consent but also how to give consent, how to voice expectations, how to say no, and how to learn to accept “no” as an answer.

“Prevention Education must start early, long before college and before young people begin engaging in sexual activity and exploring their sexual boundaries,” said Hope Cornelis, Director of Prevention Education and Outreach at SAVA. “Communication and consent are vital parts of sex education and are skills that must be learned and practiced before they are needed. There cannot and should not be sexual activity without consent. As we like to say in our presentations in high school students, if you’re not ready to talk about it, you’re not ready to do it.”

Clear, honest communication is key to healthy, respectful interactions, inside and outside of the dorm room.

Consent is not difficult to gain. Just talk about it.