Why are we still pouring: Consent and Cornell University
Imagine you’re offered a cup of tea. At first, you want the tea, but when it’s brought to you change your mind and are no longer feeling the desire to have a cup.
No one would argue or call you a tease for changing your mind. You simply wouldn’t drink it and we would all move on.
Just like a person’s desire for tea, consent can be withdrawn at any time.
The tea metaphor is powerful because it allows us to remove the situation from our emotions and selfish desires and move forward. While this metaphor makes consent seem simple, real-world cases often become clouded by the effects of alcohol, peer pressure, power dynamics, and public opinion.
Sometimes a person has had enough tea, and it’s an institution’s job to punish the people who won’t stop pouring.
A person’s previous choices, however dangerous or taboo, do not erase their right to bodily autonomy and respect.
The Cornell case centers on plaintiff, Jane Doe, whose complaint addressed eleven individuals and institutions who failed to protect her and the seven men who sexually assaulted her.
Cornell University neglected to adequately punish these fraternity members who raped and forced drugs upon her. They were even offered relief from their suspension if they opted to write an essay addressing their wrong doings.
“Cornell shows exactly why so many girls are scared,” said Arwen McGreggor, a Psychology student at Saddleback College, “she came forward and then nothing happened.”
In a situation where these men should’ve faced years in prison, expulsion, and permanent public scrutiny, they instead had a few leisurely days off school and wrote a brief essay, to say the system failed her is beyond an understatement.
At first, Jane Doe had an army behind her. People online went from avidly supporting the plaintiff to slut-shaming her because news came out that she had consented to 2 of the 7 men she was assaulted by.
Some leaked texts of the incident also caused the tables to turn with people interpreting her trauma and attempt to understand what happened to her as it being consensual. This online discourse is an example of why people don’t get the support they need.
People need it to be either black or white without even stopping to consider the grey areas.
Jane Doe’s case is completely grey, but it does not mean she doesn’t deserve support when something clearly tragic happened to her.
The moment a case becomes complicated, public sympathy disappears. We expect victims to be perfect, to make every correct decision, and to have no contradictory emotions. Yet real life doesn’t work that way. Trauma is messy. Intoxication is messy. Human decision-making is messy. Complexity should encourage deeper examination, not less compassion.
For Cornell to sweep this under the rug simply because of the grey areas of the situation, is to not value the safety of their students.
When did our world decide that the victims must prove their innocence while the guilty run free? Yes, she made a mistake, but, no, she did not deserve that.
Jane Doe was clearly vulnerable and heavily intoxicated which the defendants would’ve been aware of due to the number of drugs they gave her and forced upon her body.
Consent cannot be given when you’re under the influence. No one can drink tea when they are struggling to even hold the cup.
Cornell had a chance to show that true strength isn’t in status, but instead protecting the vulnerable. The world doesn’t need more statements or essays; it needs consequences for those who abuse it and empathy towards those who cower beneath it.
The lesson of the tea metaphor was never really about tea. It was about respect.
Respect means accepting that consent can be withdrawn at any time. It means recognizing vulnerability instead of exploiting it. It means understanding that a person’s mistakes do not erase their humanity or their right to safety.
In Jane Doe’s case, too many people focused on whether she was the perfect victim instead of whether others had failed in their responsibility to protect her.
The real question is not whether she ever accepted the tea. The real question is why people kept pouring after she could no longer choose for herself?
