"This is not a legal proceeding" : deconstructing the new Title IX
In this senior thesis, I analyze the legalistic framework of Whitman College’s Title IX grievance policy from 2011-2016 and its effect on the public understanding of Title IX. Examining the Office for Civil Rights’ push for collegiate adjudication of sexual assault as a direct result of the 2011 Dear Colleague Letter (DCL), I find that the DCL shifts the focus of Title IX from equal representation to student safety. I argue that this shift led to a series of campus policies that speak in legalese, but have none of the authority of the law. For me, the exigency of college Title IX grievance policies stems from a failure of the legal system to provide justice for victims of sexual assault. Yet, I found that Title IX does not resolve that exigency or provide justice. Employing a feminist deconstructive strategy, I argue that the legalistic framework in collegiate adjudications (which are not legal proceedings) portray themselves as a fair system that putatively delivers justice. I also argue that meeting the standards of the judicial system can never develop into justice. I utilize a feminist interpretation of Jacques Derrida’s theory of deconstruction to demonstrate how required collegiate adjudication of sexual assault functionally decriminalizes rape instead of offering a just means of redress.
If you have questions about permitted uses of this content, please contact the Arminda administrator: http://works.whitman.edu/contact-arminda