A guest speaker for the UCSB Young Americans for Liberty (YAL) on Wednesday spoke against commonly held beliefs regarding sexual assault on college campuses.
Guest Speaker Andrew Cavarno, a fourth-year history major and member of Young Americans for Liberty, argued that a frequently referenced statistic of one in four women being sexually assaulted on college campuses is heavily inflated and lacking in evidence.
“There is absolutely no evidence of a rape epidemic on college campuses,” Cavarno said. “The word epidemic implies that there’s a sudden wave of sexual violence, or that things are getting worse – this is just not the case.”
YAL originally intended the event to be a panel discussion featuring speakers from differing sides of the argument. Pointing to an empty chair beside him, Cavarno emphasized that no one with an opposing view was present to make the case for the statistic, even after having sent out “hundreds of emails.”
“Why is that chair empty?” Cavarno asked, “If all the evidence is truly on that side, if it is beyond reproach, if there’s no reason to debate this, then why is this chair empty?”
Cavarno argued that while sexual assault on campuses is an important issue, the current system infringes upon due process rights.
“Regardless of the numbers, we still have to have a system that works,” Cavarno said. “Regardless of whether its one in five or one in 50, we still need a system that allows survivors to receive support but also a system that does not infringe on the due process rights of accused students.”
“There is absolutely no evidence of a rape epidemic on college campuses.” — Andrew Cavarno
Cavarno criticized a study conducted by the Association of American Universities, stating that it had a sample with an “extraordinarily low response rate” and an “over-broad definition of sexual assault.” He also argued that the study does not distinguish between acts of sexual assault and acts of sexual battery.
“Both sexual assault and sexual battery are inexcusable, but they are not the same kind of action,” Cavarno said. “The one in five statistic on the other hand uses definitions that fail to distinguish between a girl getting her ass grabbed at a party and being forcibly penetrated, or having someone have sex with her when she is incapacitated.”
Cavarno argued that the way schools handle sexual assault often ruins the careers and social lives of men by unfairly branding them as rapists. Cavarno then wrapped up his speech saying “feminism teaches the notion that men are not deserving of empathy,” concluding that “schools should not adjudicate sexual assault.”
James Cornell, fourth-year electrical engineering major and Vice President of Young Americans for Liberty, said the speech was “very factual and academic.”
“I think [the statistic] paints a very bad image of males in society and males on college campuses,” Cornell said. “It instills a lot of fear into women so they don’t feel safe on college campuses where they should be.”
Katia Stern, a second-year financial math and statistics major, said that inflated statistics devalue the instances of more heinous cases of rape.
“I think if the statistic is over-exaggerated it sort of devalues the worst cases of the rape, and it makes it seem like it’s a lot more prevalent and we start to consider really minor accusations in the compass of the broader definition of rape,” Stern said. “It kind of diminishes the value of individuals who are brutally raped.”
On the other hand, a first-year anthropology major, who asked to remain anonymous, said universities should support victims of sexual assault by providing programs like Campus Advocacy Resources & Education (CARE) and Counseling and Psychological Services (CAPS).
“I don’t think that it’s wrong for universities to be involved in advocating for victims of sexual assault,” she said. “I was sexually assaulted as a minor and I feel like the system that I had before university has utterly failed me, and I feel like it’s very important to have CARE and CAPs and for this university to be very strict on people who are accused.”
I’m curious, is the purpose of this club to collaborate on these campus issues and try to resolve them? Or to just discuss/argue/feed each other’s egos? The initial written goal of this club seemed promising and inviting but it seems more like a debate club.
As you can see in the article, Andrew Cavarno tried to reach out to multiple other feminist student groups and was rebuffed every time. I wish the author of the article had included a few of his quotes about the type of reactions he got, they were pretty telling – including the head of the Feminist Studies department Laury Oaks openly saying that “It is important not to have debates” and other feminist groups refusing to debate because they didn’t want to give the impression that there was any legitimate controversy. Right now, we at YAL are giving voice to… Read more »
This is very exciting! Keep doing such good and necessary work.
You may have missed the whole point.
The speaker was explaining that the issue leaves little to be resolved since it is built on a lie. See my post above explaining quite carefully why it is a lie.
every single member of young americans for liberty can go fuck themselves
What a well thought out, logical argument.
ur smart
i want to be smart like you
how can i be smart like u?
Young Americans for Liberty is a conservative student group. The chapter at our CSU was formed in response to illegal immigration and the DREAM Act. I too question the 1 in 5 statistic and wonder if it was cooked up simply to advance a particular agenda. I find it very telling that no one who agreed with the number was willing to show up. Does that mean the stat is actually indefensible.
I’ve read their official description and it’s means for people of all views regardless of whether it’s left, right, etc but it seems disproportionately conservative…which is ironic.
If they promoted this event just like they did with their other ones I’m sure the likelihood of someone going would be higher.
Not inherently conservative, just a safe haven for the voices being silenced on this campus (which are disproportionately conservative). But many of our members have moderate/liberal views. They don’t agree with everything everyone in the club says, but they came to YAL because it’s the only place on campus willing to treat them with respect for disagreeing with the left-wing consensus.
Thanks Jason for the clarification. The YAF group at my CSU advertises itself as conservative bordering on the far right of the spectrum. A Bernie Sanders supporter would not be welcomed there. Sounds like the UCSB group is much more moderate. Again, thanks!
To further on Jason’s point, as the new President of the organization, I myself am a left-leaning libertarian. I wouldn’t call us moderate because we are not moderate in our views for freedom. I don’t blame you for the very one-dimensional perspective on the political spectrum because that is how it is portrayed by almost everyone, but there is more to it than just liberal or conservative, and our organization’s primary goal over the course of the next year I run it will to make that statement ring true. Thank you for your interest in the club and what we… Read more »
Thanks. However you misinterpreted my comment. You would not be welcomed in the YAL chapter at my CSU. Your support of Bernie Sanders would automatically disqualify you from membership here. The chapter here is an extension of the local Tea Party and Bernie supporters are thoroughly detested in that milieu. That’s why I used the terms I did to describe the UCSB chapter.
You cannot be both left-leaning and a libertarian. Left-leaning means you lean towards larger government involvement in your life, just the opposite of libertarianism.
I suspect “left leaning” refers to his position on social issues. For example many libertarians believe the government has no business in the bedroom and support same sex marriage. Others feel the government has over reached with the “war on drugs” and support the legalization of marijuana (and other drugs). These are positions hardly endorsed by conservatives.
You realize that the speaker himself is an outspoken supporter of Bernie Sanders… right?
Are you employing the Hillary Clinton “politics of personal destruction” strategy or the Clinton “smear by association” one?
I explain the origin of the statistic in my post above.
Thanks for writing the article, Mr. Zhang. There is one quotation attributed to me I would like to clarify. Although I do not believe Mr. Zhang misrepresented my statement with the intention of misleading his readers, this particular statement is phrased in a way in a way that lends itself to some ambiguity, and I would like to take this time to clear up that ambiguity. The sentence I would like to clarify is: “The one in five statistic on the other hand uses definitions that fail to distinguish between a girl getting her ass grabbed at a party and… Read more »
The 1-in-5 statistic has been debunked by several sources all over the internet. From second-wave feminists Camille Paglia and Christina Hoff Sommers to non-feminist Ann Coulter to lots of social scientists, including the amateur authors of the study that produced the statistic itself.
I was dismayed to see AAU’s campus survey on sexual assault and misconduct so seriously mischaracterized in this meeting, as reported by the Daily Nexus. Those who would like to see what the report actually said–with great nuance and detail–can do so via the press release and full report here: http://www.aau.edu/Climate-Survey.aspx?id=16525. Here are just two of the issues: 1. As is clear from the title, the report DOES distinguish between sexual assault and sexual misconduct. The survey included specific questions about the type of incident and the tactics used–such as physical force, alcohol or drugs. Rates of sexual assault and… Read more »
Thanks Ms. Speicher that is a very serious study. Was the study symmetric between male and female respondents?
Ann, First of all, thank you for your post! I have a couple questions for you… 1) Do you disagree that the survey is not nationally representative? 2) Do you disagree that the survey had an extremely low reporting rate (only 17% for undergraduate women)? 3) Do you disagree that portraying the results of the AAU survey as proof that 1/5 women are assaulted on campuses nationwide would be “over-simplistic, if not misleading”? 4) Do you disagree that the results are most likely “biased upward,” meaning that they are likely “too high”? 5) Do you disagree that the often repeated… Read more »
Twenty years ago at freshmen orientation, a group of women took the stage and declared that one out of FOUR female students at UCSB would end up being raped. Not a peep from the audience. In shock I wondered, “How could all these decent mothers and fathers all around us just SIT THERE and let their precious children be raped?” After spending a few years at UCSB (and working at the Nexus and ASPB) I realized it was all a big lie designed to promote fear, protect special interests and increase funding. But at least people are talking about it,… Read more »