Each year during Orientation week at Sydney University, boys from St Paul’s invite women from the all-female colleges to their bar, the Salisbury, for the “Tight and White” party.

A girl about to have shots drank off her body at a St Paul's college party

The night pretty much does what it says on the tin. The tighter and whiter the clothes the better. Especially when the girls are soaked in water on arrival, their clothes now transparent and sticking to their bodies.

And even more so when they lie down on the bar while men drink shots of spirits off their bodies, off their bare stomachs, breasts and thighs.

This is, for many, part of their first experience of adult life, their first time away from home. It is also one of the very first official and advertised college events of the year, paid for by the students’ fees.

Of those who attend events like the “Tight and White” party, there will be those who profess to having a really good time, but there are many who don’t. The problem is, the social currency which is exchanged for status, friends and a support network away from one’s family, is to be found through participating and accepting the sexist, elitist culture which colleges perpetuate.

Men initiate men into a world of disrespecting women and bad behaviour from the moment they arrive at college, revelling in the “boys-will-be-boys” and “tradition” nonsense which has been used for far too long to justify a hideous culture.

But women also initiate other women into this world, knowing that subjugation is a way to gain a kind of power and status in the culture. Women who don’t publicly want to be seen as having a problem with college life often tell a very different story privately.

I lived in a residential college at the University of Sydney for several years. I’m now a PhD student researching girls and women. I heard about and witnessed many horrific events in college life. I was not surprised in the least to read of the allegations of sexism and violence taking place on college grounds as this kind of behaviour is totally obvious to anyone who’s lived in one of these places.

I don’t wish, here, to detail the specific horrors that I’ve seen or experiences I’ve personally had. I don’t want to reproduce other women’s trauma in print and I think that there is already a fairly rich picture of the nature of college culture. I do, however, want to talk about some of the reasons women who have experienced terrible things at college may be reluctant to either speak out at all or seek legal action.

It’s a fact that sexual assault is underreported and that many women choose not to get involved in a daunting legal process where it’s hard to get a conviction. This is compounded in residential college situations for a number of reasons. If you speak out you potentially cut yourself off from a social, home and academic life. Rocking the boat is never easy, but especially so when in the midst of personal trauma. Speaking out in the face of a culture that has been ignored for years is not easy either.

The community response to reports of ‘pro-rape’ Facebook pages and accounts of terrible sexual assaults has understandably been one of outrage. The focus now needs to shift to how we change a dangerous misogynistic culture. There are a raft of positive changes that can take place, the first being an acknowledgement, by everyone involved in college life, that there is, indeed, a problem with the college system.

The NRL and AFL have recognised the problems in their sports and taken very seriously their commitment to changing an often sexist culture through extensive education and training campaigns with their players, despite the fact there are still ongoing problems.

The colleges similarly need to accept that their attitudes and behaviours toward women are dangerous and must take urgent steps to improve these. The time, money and effort which is funnelled into O-week activities needs to be better spent on initiating young people into interacting with each other in ways which reflect current community standards and the law.

Changes need to come from both the college administration as well as the students themselves, who are responsible for organising many O-week activities. There needs to be a real commitment to change from everyone involved in college life. Education should not be about policing consensual sexual activity or legal consumption of alcohol, but about how to treat other people with dignity and respect.

The lack of any tangible harassment and discrimination policy or procedures governing the intercollegiate community is shocking. While the University of Sydney does have a comprehensive strategy in place for dealing with complaints regarding harassment, the process quite clearly excludes the college community from making full-use of this when resolving their issues. This is largely because colleges are considered to be private, separate entities. Any new policy must be between all colleges to really work, because it is clear that as many problems exist between colleges as well as within individual ones.

There has been a push for this kind of documentation for years and it is now time that it be implemented. The residential colleges of the Universities of Melbourne and Queensland (amongst others) have put such policies into place and it is appalling that Sydney is yet to follow suit. There are many really good reasons for doing so.

First, it makes clear that harassment and discrimination are unacceptable in colleges.

Second, it gives important recourse to victims of harrasment in the early stages of the sexism and bullying. There is much to be said for ebbing the flow of bad behaviour before it becomes seriously violent and criminal.

Third, it means that there is an opportunity to actively resist in a supported fashion the current endemic sexist culture.

And fourth, if complaints of harassment and discrimination are supported by a clear and fair process where women are not made to feel excluded, this can encourage the proper reporting of sexual crimes in the more serious cases.

One can only speculate that change has been so long in coming is because that it seems too difficult. Another reason for such resistance to change is chilling, but must be considered: the colleges simply don’t want to.

If the colleges are really serious about stamping out a damaging culture and maintaining relevance in the 21st century, then comprehensive changes must happen before the new academic year and new students arrive.

124 comments

Show oldest | newest first

    • Kira says:

      10:49am | 10/11/09

      If these guys and girls want to do this, and it’s between consenting adults whats the problem? They look like their enjoying themselves to me.

    • Andrew Fox-Russell says:

      10:53am | 10/11/09

      Yep, another faminist rant about colleges. Must be flavour of the week.

      “Of those who attend events like the “Tight and White” party, there will be those who profess to having a really good time, but there are many who don’t.” - you could say thaty about any function going on anywhere anytime.

      I’m well out of college now, but inaccurate ramblings like this just shit me.

      Many people will leave college unsatisfied - maybe its just not for them, but the clear majority do love it, shown by the fact that so many stay on campus into their second, third, fourth years and beyond.

      I’m not saying that bad stuff does not go on. At times, I participated in the odd bout of binge drinking, and nudie runs, and in my young and stupid moments, I may not have treated ladies as well as I should have. I’m not condining bad behavious, but it happens everywhere.  What’s the differece to it happending at Pauls, or in the city, or in the western suburbs? Nothing. Well, at least in the intercollegiate system, each student had college mates to come to their aid if anything became awkward - can the same be said for the general populace?

    • Ella says:

      11:02am | 10/11/09

      Stop being so precious, people have a choice to participate or not.  This is not sexual assault. Get over it!

    • Alicia says:

      11:09am | 10/11/09

      OMG, don’t the girls look terrified LOL

    • Tim says:

      11:12am | 10/11/09

      I can’t believe in this day and age that women are forced to go to parties such as this and be involved in this kind of behaviour.
      Oh wait a minute, they’re not.

    • nic says:

      11:15am | 10/11/09

      The women were forced to go? Duress was used to make them wear white clothing and lay on the bar? Tut, if true, why haven’t charges been laid?
      The fact is it’s all about choise. Isn’t that what feminism’s about?

    • Daza says:

      11:22am | 10/11/09

      I suppose your one of those people who think homosexuality should be illegal to, cause it could lead to phetaphielia (tough word to spell,sorry bout tat)?

    • Dan says:

      11:40am | 10/11/09

      The pro-rape website was repulsive but to bring in something like this is absurd. The women choose to go to the party, and they choose whether or not to participate. Simply because some don’t have a good time does not equate to sexual assualt in any way, shape or form.

    • Angela says:

      11:43am | 10/11/09

      Did you say that you had left uni? It sounds like you are still there. A total disconnect from reality. The fairer sex is the fairer sex. Women are more yielding, and men are more dominating. This is how it is. It is the nature of reality. You cannot change the fundamentals of nature with words and manifestos. People are responsible for their own actions. If you don’t want to go to one of these parties, don’t go.

    • James says:

      11:47am | 10/11/09

      Carina I’m sorry but you are out of touch with reality. In practice these woman (and a growing number of young women) are as fanatical for debauchery as you claim the men are - if not more. Difference is they can claim rape on Monday if the guy doesn’t return their call - and will probably be defended by people like you.

    • Meaghan says:

      11:52am | 10/11/09

      MM: a great piece and thanks for having the courage to speak out. The abusive comments above should show everyone else exactly why that’s so hard.

    • Paula says:

      11:53am | 10/11/09

      *Looking at the comments wall*
      Wow. The naivety, chauvinism (from men and women), and compliance in accepting the perpetuation of unacceptable ideology and behavior to exist in a learning environment is disgusting.
      *To Carina*
      Thanks Carina for highlighting this issue in a mature and approachable way.  Hopefully media spot light on these issues can work in alliance with the University and colleges to actually provide changes (educational and funding) and increased security for students.

    • Ben Haslem says:

      11:54am | 10/11/09

      It’s the new puritanism. Ironic, given Paul’s was established during Queen Victoria’s reign.

    • Tim says:

      11:56am | 10/11/09

      Clearly this article is not antisex.  It is anti-misogynist.  It is taking on the trend evident in the Facebook page to override or belittle questions of women’s consent and agency.  It’s also a really good analysis of the ways in which agency can be constrained by broader sexist cultures where social status is linked to participation in things that may privately be uncomfortable for people.

    • tina says:

      11:57am | 10/11/09

      Lol @ Daza. what?

      Thanks for writing this Carina.

      The women who go to these parties choose to go, granted. But this is about the perpetuation of a culture that can become unsafe for women. When they choose to get involved in a culture which views women as mere meat- that is their choice but it doesn’t mean we can’t critique it for what it is. Participating in one’s own oppression. However, like the Girls Gone Wild phenomenon there is a certain amount of pressure to conform to the expectations of those baying for flesh and fear of social ostracism can be an effective motivator to participate.

    • bmfa says:

      11:57am | 10/11/09

      Great article Carina.

      There’s not really a great lot of choice at college, you get extremely pressured into drinking and going to these parties. I personally avoided the tight and white party, but pretended it was because I had another engagement, rather than face the pressure.

      One of the reasons women I know didn’t report their experiences of sexual assault and harassment was certinaly because of this pressure to be part of it all. It really was too hard and traumatic to deal with it within the college and to go against your ‘friends’. And to be honest, we didn’t even know who would be the appropriate person to contact within the college! When it is women from within the college’s council/students’ club - the female leaders of the college - who are being sexually assaulted, who do you turn to?

      What did happen when I was there, was a very violent and aggressive young man was told he would not be welcomed back the following year. However, a group of students persisted with the college board to have him re-instated the next year (and he was voted into a prestigious position within the college). The young woman receiving the brunt of his violence didn’t return.

      So no. There’s not really a lot of choice. A system of support for reporting incidences of violence is absolutely ovderdue. Thank you again Carina, for bringing this to light.

    • Shama says:

      11:58am | 10/11/09

      Unfortunately any such article makes feminists look like your old aunt who wanted you to go out completely covered up.  Or at least the comments are pretty much on the lines of consenting adults, girls having fun, etc. etc.  I think the point really isn’t that girls might enjoy being white, tight and wet and as adults have every right to go to a college night where they are expected to be so.  It’s that attitudes haven’t changed.  In the context of the FB group, this can potentially be a take off point for condoning rape and sexual harrassment – she’s ready to be white, tight and wet and she must want it might be one reasoning.  And the Brazil case of the girl in a mini-skirt and cries of whore following her – from male and female students – and her subsequent expulsion indicates that attitudes haven’t changed at all.  Every such incident indicates that society at large still has a lot of anxiety about women who may appear to be sexually free or wear stuff that is seen as sexually provocative.  What’s worse is the implied notion that it’s OK to be violent to them and the idea that once they have adopted such a position they have relinquished the right to feel violated or degraded

    • Sen Raj says:

      11:59am | 10/11/09

      I don’t think the question is as simple as enjoyment or abuse. Rather, what Carina’s article is getting us to think about is how consent and willingness to participate are implicated in how both men and women think of female bodies. The article does not initiate a ‘rant against men’ or suggesting that women lack the choice or capacity to consent, instead it is making the valid point that there is a lack of university (and legal) infrastructure to support women who feel they have been subject to harassment. Carina mentions that this is not about policing consensual sexual activity or regulating alcohol consumption, but it is about the dignity and respect that should be afforded to women. ‘Choice’ is not a simple matter. Women have long been positioned as objects for sexualisation and exploitation by men, and it is impossible to deny the resonances of this in some college parties. This does not mean that women should not be able to sexualise their bodies if they wish, rather I am suggesting that this sexualisation should not be coerced by others (the ability of a single woman to ‘choose’ in a masculine space such as a all boys college is limited).

      Education is the key and that is what the article promotes. Women should have the agency to decide who and how many people they sleep with, what they wear and how to act. However, it is important that men do not exploit women in situations where their ‘choice’ is limited by insecurity, peer pressure, or (the ‘boys club’) college social norms. Making people more aware of sexual ethics and the importance of bodily integrity is not a ‘feminist rant’, but one crucial to any social interaction. I am not suggesting that sexual harassment is true for all colleges and parties, and neither is Carina. Rather, the article emphasises that we need to promote awareness and put in place sexual harassment policies for those women who feel pressured or coerced into particular activities.

    • Sarah says:

      12:01pm | 10/11/09

      Hear, hear Carina.

    • Nazanin Gh says:

      12:10pm | 10/11/09

      Great article Carina..I believe what you keep warning is “Education”..it’s not the question of who wants to be where for God’s sake.. the problem is the culture of being anywhere should be changed especially when it come to colleges.. It’s sad how some people can’t differ choice from knowledge! Thanks Carina..we need people like you to speak out!

    • Fiona says:

      12:11pm | 10/11/09

      ‘Tight and white’’ - the cream of society -  would that be the rich and thick sort…?  I’m stunned by the complacency displayed in some of these comments - particularly the whole ‘it happens outside the college so what’s the problem’  If something is widespread then that makes it OK? Unbelievable!

    • Kristian says:

      12:11pm | 10/11/09

      It is clear that the authors of the previous comments didn’t read the article, just looked at the picture.

      Kira: As the article notes, on many occasions, there is the on going of sexual assault. This is not a consensual act.
      Andrew Fox-Russell: Your argument seems to be that because sexual assault occurs elsewhere, it shouldn’t be an issue that it occurs at St Pauls. I’m sorry, but you’re either against sexual assault, or you’re not. Pick a side.
      Ella: Read the article, it isn’t about the photograph. But nice try!
      Alicia: Or is it Ella? Again, read the article! Though I don’t know how you tell what facial expression the girls have, since they are blurred.
      Tim: Again, read the article. Thanks!
      nic: Oh… you also didn’t read the article.
      Daza: Huh? Welcome to crazy town.

      This is a great article. I don’t know if education alone can fix the problem, but it is a necessary part of the process of shifting the culture. Expulsion from the university for anyone involved in these kinds of activities, including the chalking and facebook stuff, would begin to send the right message to these boys.

      A strong message from the University management would also be useful.  The message to students from the VC was weak.

    • catri says:

      12:13pm | 10/11/09

      Hi Carina,

      I’m an old coll as well and I think you’re spot on about college culture - and the ways in which very young women and men are initiated into it. When you’re very young, away from home, coming to terms with a new environment, I think you’re very susceptible to peer pressure. Sure, you can choose not to go to the tight and white party, or to the Senior/Freshette harbour cruises, or to whatever event is current, but you risk being labeled a loser, a snob, uptight, frigid, feminist (not that!), no fun, disloyal and thus some degree of isolation. Those who are suggesting that you can opt out of a live-in culture are the ones who are out of touch.  And I’m just despairing about those, like nic, who invoke “feminism” and “choice” as a defence of this kind of institutionalised misogyny ever getting in touch.

      As for the comments above, I agree with Meaghan. They show exactly why it’s been so hard to reform these institutions. Bullshit, head in the sand defences of an archaic approach to sex and gender.

    • Feministromantic says:

      12:19pm | 10/11/09

      It’s sad when so many of the comments above simply replicate the ingrained sexist attitudes that Carina is talking about in her article (and tellingly, can’t even see it). Simply using neo-liberal ideals of choice and individualism as justification for such behavior. Oh and haven’t they got us far…
      Great piece and thanks for starting a discussion that brings feminist discussion in the fore ( as it is obviously very much needed) as well as offering some insights in to how we can move forward and negotiate such institutionalized sexism.

    • tina says:

      12:23pm | 10/11/09

      I would also like to point out that the people saying that it happens everywhere so shut up, are also participating in a culture of denial. We should tackle this problem where we see it, so that those young people who go to colleges don’t take it with them when they leave. Tackle the problem here and the benefits will be felt throughout society.

    • Carmel says:

      12:29pm | 10/11/09

      It is disappointing to see that most of the negative comments about Carina’s article rely on the same old simplistic, ignorant and misguided opinions we should all be well past by now.

    • Tristan Winter says:

      12:38pm | 10/11/09

      @FeministRomantic once again it’s the supposed feminist propagating the real misogyny. Just because you don’t agree with women’s choices, doesn’t give you the right to attack them for it.

    • Feminist says:

      12:39pm | 10/11/09

      The saddest part is the girls who go along to these events and participate willingly (as seen in the photo). More respect to those women who refuse to be sex objects and to be appreciated for their brains, not their loins!

    • MC says:

      12:40pm | 10/11/09

      Thanks so much for this Carina - your article captures a whole lot of other experiences I heard about for the first time yesterday. The idea of having the choice to refuse this culture really assumes there are alternatives being championed - I look forward to seeing evidence of that…

    • Tom says:

      12:40pm | 10/11/09

      A bit of perspective here - although rape is undoubtedly a heinous and despicable crime, as yet there has been absolutely no evidence that it is any more of an issue in colleges than anywhere else in society. Hence, to single out colleges for special attention smacks of the politics of envy rather than any actual evidence that the so - called ‘rape culture’ that apparently exists inside of these colleges is a greater problem than in other areas of society. Rape and other forms of violence (and not just violence against women) should be targeted at a societal level, and not just at institutions such as St. Pauls. 

      The so - called ‘pro - rape’ Facebook group was actually the name of a soccer team, as reported by ABC. Although the choice of name (Define Statutory) is undoubtedly sickening, to use the immature and ill thought - out naming of a soccer team as evidence of an endemic rape culture is absurd. That the Herald journalist failed to mention this in my opinion typifies the rapid decline of that paper into the depths of sensationalist tabloid journalism.

      If rape or other assault occurred within these colleges, then of course the perpetrators should feel the full force of the law, and it is a reasonable suggestion to establish some kind of mechanism with which to deal with such issues within universities and colleges. However, to judge colleges and their residents on the basis of what largely appear to be anonymously sourced claims of misogynistic behaviour is unfair and contrary to the principle of ‘innocent until proven guilty’  that supposedly exists in this country.

    • Tim says:

      12:43pm | 10/11/09

      @Feministromantic.
      So you’re against choice and individualism?
      You’re right, we should legislate against free will straight away. Women are obviously unable to make their own decisions and take responsibility for themselves.

    • PK says:

      12:51pm | 10/11/09

      @ James, I hope you or no one close to you is ever raped or sexually assaulted. Then you’ll know the feeling of having people like yourself dismiss something truly horrendous as ‘oh, they are just claiming rape again’ 
      this culture is disgusting and it’s about time people addressed the boys club culture in institutions like these.

    • Sarah says:

      12:53pm | 10/11/09

      @ Tim 12:43pm - there is a significant difference between true, informed consent and coercion.
      There will be some women who will freely attend these events, and have a good time. But there are others that will attend out of pressure to fit in, particularly during O-week. Include excessive amounts of alcohol as a social lubricant, and the boundary between consent and non-consent becomes very blurred (for all parties involved).

    • Ann says:

      12:53pm | 10/11/09

      Thankyou SO MUCH Carina for speaking out on this. Your comments here are much braver, intelligent and forward thinking than those of the College heads and the Vice Chancellor. Which also proves the point about how entrenched the culture of upper class misogyny is. It’s pretty embarrassing for Sydney Uni. Old boys much?

    • AdamC says:

      12:54pm | 10/11/09

      I would endorse some of the ideas in this post. A properly-enforced harassment policy and a zero-tolerance approach to violence of all kinds should be a given. Having said that, one goes too far when one tries to lump wild partying (they could just be having a good time, Carina!) with sexual assault and misogyny. Using female emancipation and feminism as a wedge for a puritanical agenda is not cool.

    • Macon Paine says:

      12:56pm | 10/11/09

      @ Feministromantic
      Wow aren’t you a piece of work love! Im puzzled by your arguement though, are you suggesting that choice and individualism are bad things? If yes should they be forcibly taken away from people? And what should we replace them with?
      At the end of the day people are free to make good decisions or bad decisions whether you like it or not. What these people are doing is making bad decisions and we dont need some nanny state solution.

    • Glen says:

      01:00pm | 10/11/09

      Good piece, Carina. The blokes who commented up the top need to learn that as well as an ethics of fun there also needs to be an ethics of care. Being a man is not just about conquering but also about protecting. You get much more respect around the traps if you get a reputation for being a decent bloke as well as being able to sink piss and charm the ladies.

    • Kristian says:

      01:13pm | 10/11/09

      @Tom: Education is targeted generally across society (for example; the “Violence Against Women: Australia says No” campaign), but that doesn’t mean it shouldn’t also be applied in specific situations, just like it has with the NRL.

      @Tim: Your misreading of Feministromantic’s comment seems to suggest you’re here to troll and cause a ruckus than to engage in an intelligent dialogue. If you’re against the kinds of behaviour that are being described, then you should engage with people with a more generous interpretation of their words, not the worst possible interpretation.

      Clearly Feministromantic is not suggesting that free will should be legislated against, or anything as ridiculously hyperbolic as you’re trying to suggest.

      “Simply using neo-liberal ideals of choice and individualism as justification for such behavior” does not mean “you’re against choice and individualism”. Just that a discourse that involves ONLY choice and individualism is insufficient to understand and combat the problem. When a drunk driver plows into a car, is it sufficient to say “well, the victims CHOSE to be on the roads, it’s the INDIVIDUAL risk they take!”?

    • Jessi says:

      01:15pm | 10/11/09

      Thanks for the article Carina.
      I have lived at college, and yes, you have the free choice to go and participate in the parties, and no, you don’t have to take off your shirt/wear barely anything/drink to excess.  Except wait, you do. You do if you want to be perceived as a fun person, or to keep friends, or to make friends.
      And often at these events you’re more than pressured by what’s going on around you.  You’re encouraged by the other people who are there, and in some cases you’re fairly well forced into doing things that don’t make you feel comfortable - people refill your drink, and rather than insult them by pouring it out, you drink it. 
      Some guy picks you up and puts you on the bar - I am small and can hardly prevent him from doing that without kicking him in the scrotum, which most would consider an overreaction.
      A group of people surround you and shout “scull scull scull” or “show us your tits” and you’re left wondering if you can get out of there alive if you don’t do as they demand…

    • Jason says:

      01:31pm | 10/11/09

      Nice piece, Carina. The point that so many above have missed is that if these are the main kinds of social activity on offer in colleges, making a choice not to go can mean choosing not to have an active social life, at an age where this is important. If there’s not a problem with sexism in some colleges, how do you explain the Facebook group?

    • Amanda says:

      01:35pm | 10/11/09

      To Ella, Kira, Alicia, Andrew Fox-Russell and the others:

      You are missing the point. The issue here is not about ‘sexual assualt’ or ‘duress’ - Carina Garland is trying to make a bigger point about the culture that exists on Colleges. Each Orientation week I hear about these ‘tight and white parties’ and am amazed that this still happens in 2009.

    • Nat says:

      01:35pm | 10/11/09

      @ Jessi
      “You do if you want to be perceived as a fun person, or to keep friends, or to make friends.”
      How sad that the want of friendship and how others perceive you is more important than having a bit of self respect…

    • Moira says:

      01:38pm | 10/11/09

      Thanks Carina for your article, the culture of violence is the foundation for de-humanism. I hope you continue to speak up for those who may find they can’t ... and I hope all the colleges reflect on their reason for being in the first place,  a safe haven - a sanctuary for study and a place to call home

    • Tim says:

      01:42pm | 10/11/09

      @Kristian,
      your example is just as far out.
      Yes every time an individual drives on the road they are patently accepting a small amount of risk. Part of that would be the chance they have an accident. Does this mean that an accident with a drunk driver would be their fault. Of course not.
      Jessi’s comment above sums it up. You have to do these things if you want to be perceived as a fun person, to make and keep friends.
      I didn’t know morals could be so easily bought.

    • Samuel Meenahan says:

      01:43pm | 10/11/09

      No, Tim. Feminisromantic is not against choice or individualism. Rather she (I’m not being gender assumptive - I know “Feministromantic) is suggesting that the notion of choice is part of a neo-liberalist discourse which imagines all people are afforded equal capacity to MAKE choices. This is simply not the case. As Sen Raj elucidates, choice is not a simple concept. I think it’s you, Tim, who says feminism is about choice. To some extent, I would agree with you. But feminism is also about critiquing the ways in which choice is compromised by a whole host of other factors. These women may very well have chosen to attened “white and tight” but there are a number of influences which determine that choice and the decisions which lead up to - an important one is the personal account offered by bmfa that suggests women participate in events like “white and tight” due to fear of being disassociated or ostracised from college communities. Neo-liberalism and the discourse of choice, as Feministromantic tried to suggest - but it obviously went over your head - assumes an apparent freedom or volition TO choose. This idea is then used to excuse particular behaviours. So, the feminist rants that people are complaining about are actually quite important because they attempt to demonstrate the ways in which people are complicit in a whole host of ideas and attitudes without being aware of them. That women attend(ed) “white and tight” MIGHT be fine if we could say with any degree of certainty that they were there in result of impartial decision, and the freedom of choices. But, we can’t. The probably is not necessarily that women are behaving licentiously, but that they do so at an event in a culture which permits rape and other forms of sexual violence. When you look at this event in relation to the other degrading events within colleges, the rhetoric of choice becomes more complicated than you and the other people on this ‘blog’ imagine.

      Well done, Carina! You’re article is terribly important. As is the discussion which follows!

    • David C says:

      01:46pm | 10/11/09

      Isnt the issue here legal and illegal behaviour? Rape, assault , drink driving are illegal behaviours. Getting drunk at a party, wearing tightie whities is not as yet (although it sounds like there is a big push here to make it so)
      The morality argument once again comes in to play here and that I am afraid is down to personal choice.

    • SPC says:

      01:52pm | 10/11/09

      @ Jessi. Adults take responsibility for the choices they make, be they victims or perpetrators and the existence of peer-pressure cannot diminish that responsibility. Whether it is pressure on a 15 year old to tell a racist joke, pressure on a 17 year old to start smoking with friends, pressure as an 18 year old to go to a party during your HSC exams, pressure as a 19 year old to lie on a bar top, pressure as a 25 year old to work your desk job on a Saturday because your boss wants you to…there are always others around you who will judge you for you not doing what they want you to do.

      A life lived trying to gain others’ approval is not your own life. It is particularly curious to live your life seeking the approval of those you don’t respect.

      I have been to dozens of these parties and I have never seen any evidence that anyone is not free to walk out the door at any moment. Many do so before things get wild (myself included, typically) and many never come in the door. Be liberal-minded; don’t judge others for doing what makes them happy, so long as it doesn’t hurt you.

    • Tom says:

      01:53pm | 10/11/09

      Kristian, that is a fair point, as I said, perhaps there would be some merit in universities setting up a mechanism for which people who have been the victim of sexual violence (or any other crime for that matter) within the university can make a complaint confidentially, and then have the options such as reporting the incident to the police, receiving counselling etc. laid out to them in a clear and supportive manner.

      I don’t attend Paul’s, but I have a lot of very close friends there, whom I have attended school and university with, and worked with. I know none of them would condone rape or any other form of violence against women, much less participate in it. I just find it frankly offensive that the Herald, formerly a respectable paper, has tarred and feathered the whole lot of them based upon what turned out to be the naming of a soccer team.

      Where there is a problem, it should certainly be dealt with and the perpetrators punished. But the thrust of the original SMH article was sensationalist, largely baseless and has no place in any respectable publication.

    • Jane Park says:

      01:54pm | 10/11/09

      Terrific article, Carina - I think you hit the problems spot on, and all the denigrating comments on the board serve to confirm your points. There’s nothing wrong with people having “fun” - but it’s important to question who’s having the fun at whose expense and with what costs - to individuals and institutions.

    • Feministromantic says:

      01:57pm | 10/11/09

      I am not at all saying individual choice is bad, far from it. Refer back to Sen’s comment above, about the complicated nature of choice, as well as the fact that neo-liberal ideas of choice are framed predominantly within patriarchal contexts. As Carina is suggesting, these college environments replicate this narrow often sexist idea of choice. This is what I suggest we need to re-think seriously, so that women can have ‘real’ choice (not confined by one genders traditions).

    • Timothy says:

      01:58pm | 10/11/09

      Excellent article Carina.
      I find myself irritated by the ways in which the rhetoric of “self responsibility” is used by some contributors above as a justification for the most crude forms of libertarianism. Surely taking responsibility means, first and foremost, men taking responsibility for sexual harassment and sexual assault. How is it that victims are required to take “responsibility” for their “decisions”, while perpetrators are seen as passive participants in normalised campus cultures?
      I also think the college warden needs to have a serious think about what it means to be responsible and accountable when managing an institution that profits from its “fun” reputation, if that reputation serves to naturalise or obscure incidents of sexual assault.
      I am further disgusted that Dr Ivan Head has used this opportunity to further promote the college as “exciting and stimulating”, as if discussions about serious criminal acts are an appropriate forum for self-advertising. His response indicates no willingness on his own part to initiate cultural change, despite evidence that the mechanisms already in place are evidently insufficient.
      I also can’t help thinking that the incident would have been treated quite differently if evidence was produced of men being raped on campus by other men. The argumentative cliche that the “victims [girls] are asking for it” would certainly become a little less comfortable for some of these college boys.

    • Rollo says:

      02:01pm | 10/11/09

      OMG Where’s Eric????
      Has anyone checked the hospitals?

    • Ashlee says:

      02:04pm | 10/11/09

      Great article Carina.

      The real question I have though is why these elitist colleges are allowed to continue on our PUBLIC university campuses.  Colleges on Australian university campuses should be there for the provision of affordable accommodation to students from rural and regional backgrounds, not as some sort of sad monument to the boys club culture perpetuated in many private schools.

      If you want to go to a private university, get on a plane and go to the US and pay through the nose for your education.  Australian universities are supposed to reflect a culture of inclusion rather than elitism — that’s why the government subsidizes such a huge chunk of your fees, kids.

      Perhaps the college culture would be best smashed by ceasing to admit wannabe toffs who don’t want to take the 15 minute bus ride to campus from the Eastern Suburbs or North Shore. Instead unis should be using these on-campus halls to provide a place for students from rural and regional areas who are struggling, or going to struggle, to meet the high costs of living in the city.  Colleges should be used to break down access barriers to university inclusion, not to build them.

      I’m sure not all colleges are like this, and I haven’t heard about these sorts of issues so much from rural campuses, or even other campuses in Sydney — though as Carina points out, it could be because of a culture of silence.  So perhaps it’s the admission policies of these colleges that are causing some of the problems.

    • SM says:

      02:07pm | 10/11/09

      Damn students

      No need to overcomplicate things and make the issue sound like some sort of freakin’ psychology thesis…

      Just read David C@1.46

      Class dismissed

      I’m off to the bar

    • Tim says:

      02:07pm | 10/11/09

      Samuel,
      Yes i think it is all about choice. The choice for us all, males and females, to be strong enough to make our own decisions and take responsibility for them.
      You talk about coercion and pressure but every choice we make in life comes with some level of coercion. Does this mean that all decisions are compromised? What level of coercion or pressure is acceptable and what is not?
      My friends pressured me to try smoking when i was younger. Whose fault would it have been if i had taken it up?

    • Ashlee says:

      02:15pm | 10/11/09

      Also, to anyone who had a full sense of identity, social awareness and was completely unable to resist peer pressure at the age of 17 or 18… you must be too old to remember being 18 properly, or you were too drunk.

      Watch your teen drama series or movies, and that sense of social angst still applies at the college starting age… especially when you are talking about the big transition between school and university.

      So to those who say that participation in these parties is a choice for women… well.  I don’t think that’s entirely true.  Many see involvement in these activities as something they are obliged to do to fit into their new social environment.

    • Liam says:

      02:26pm | 10/11/09

      @Tim. - “You’re right, we should legislate against free will straight away. Women are obviously unable to make their own decisions and take responsibility for themselves.” -

      Invoking such a facile conception of free will, even rhetorically, points to the heavy-handedness of your reading of the social relations described in this article, while being more broadly indicative of the intent of many people above to make overly simplistic distinctions between legal and moral issues.
       
      Such an understanding of free will too often manifests in the courtroom (or before it reaches the courtroom, which it rarely does), operating on behalf of an accused person in order to absolve (usually) his responsibility by passing the buck - ‘she was there of her own free will’ - or by undermining free will itself - ‘I was so drunk I don’t remember what happened/ I didn’t know what I was doing’.

      Even a cursory consideration of thinking about how people interact with one another, in contexts such as friendship groups, colleges, and anywhere else for that matter, should bring to light that issues such as power, acceptance and cultural capital/status, complicate an understanding of people as beings willing themselves into existence. This is especially the case when we are thinking through sexual assault and the cultural attitudes that establish the conditions for this to occur.

      Surely, even a college student could understand this.

      A great article Carina. Well done.

    • Alex says:

      02:28pm | 10/11/09

      I’m sitting in my room in one of the residential colleges as we speak. The article is right in some respects, but again, it exaggerates the problem in the colleges

      1) The photo above could have been taken in numerous households in Australia on a Friday night, and some licensed venues too.
      2) Yes, this is so similar to the problem facing the football codes.

      What do these two points indicate? They say that this is a societal problem, not simply one for colleges. It goes hand in hand with Australia’s binge drinking culture. The insular nature of the colleges means that they do become like their own little world- a world that is easily critiqued by outsiders. Similarly, the college age demographic makes this sort of behaviour more likely- would you expect a crowd of retirees do be doing body shots? Its much more difficult for us to look in upon Australian culture more generally, and to fix it, but that’s what we must do. And in many ways, colleges are leading this process- mine certainly- through a comprehensive pastoral support system, harassment policies and (very good) educational seminars. I’m not sure many other groups in the country could claim such steps.

      Lastly, the colleges are an easy target- its easy to attach ‘misogynist’ to the already popular stereotypes of wealth, arrogance and private schools. But like all stereotypes, these fail to tell the real story; they say nothing about the intelligent (and, might I add, well informed) debate that has occurred on over lunch and dinner in the colleges in the last two days. It tells nothing of the willingness to self-critique, nor the extensive application process (complete with character assessments by both the heads of colleges and students) that aims to ensure such negative influences are recognised and rejected before they even arrive here. These stereotypes also say nothing of the social skills that living with 250 other people with diverse views and talents (if not diverse backgrounds, I willingly admit) that time college develops- sensitivity to other’s needs and feelings, respect, tolerance and understanding of differences.

      Let’s fix the real problem, rather than taking the easy option.

    • G says:

      02:40pm | 10/11/09

      Carina,

      I agree that women or men should never be subjected to any form of sexual assault or unwanted advances and yes more education and other strategies are needed.

      However, the issue fundamentally has to be about consent.  Who are you to enforce your moral standards of what is appropriate behaviour or what your consider to be subjugation on to some one else.  What you think to be not acceptable, may be o.k. for some other people.  It is about individual choice. 

      If you wish to repress the way women behave to meet your moral standards then I am afraid you are a little behind the times.  These people are not morally bankrupt but are exercising their right to choose, whether the choice is dumb or not, do you really have the right to question it?

    • Andrew Fox-Russell says:

      02:41pm | 10/11/09

      Really Ashlee? You see it in teen flicks, so it must be true? Like vampires, band camp, and having to drive across America because your mate sent a porno to his girlfriend?

    • NB says:

      02:58pm | 10/11/09

      They are adults who have the capacity to make their own decisions of whether or not they partake in such events as ‘tight and white’.
      Noone is forcing anyone to do ANYTHING, or to get involve in these events, which believe it or not DO encourage bonding and socialising. But you probably wouldnt know because you just sat in your room throughout your whole college life slaving to be a D-grade journalist.
      O-Week caters of those who choose not to drink, “dry events” are run every day and night as alternatives.
      THESE PEOPLE ARE ADULTS, they make their own decisions

    • Fed-up! says:

      03:02pm | 10/11/09

      Ashlee, your ignorance is astounding and your suggestions unfeasible. Where should the line be drawn? If it takes more than an hour by public transport to get to uni? And your folks also can’t earn over 100K between them? Have you considered the students with wealthy folks, but who have to pay for themselves?
      As a country kid, I’m glad to have access to a College, but I got in the same way everyone else did - on merit. If the majority of school-leavers with high academic achievement, cultural or sporting prowess and a history of community involvement/leadership come from private schools, why shouldn’t they be allowed to reside on campus? Most people I went to school with didn’t want to go to uni and certainly weren’t going to work for it.
      A fact you may not realise, is the proportion of private school kids applying to USyd colleges easily outweighs those from public schools. If you don’t apply, you wont get in!

    • Remy says:

      03:06pm | 10/11/09

      Great article Carina!
      It’s interesting (and tragicomical) to hear many comments on the wall coalescing around two counter-arguments: (1) that this article is some feminist rant; or (2) hey! it’s liberal free-choice-all-round-they-probably-asked-for-it-let’s-do-a-sex-positive-reading-of-this. Disappointing as it is for me as an old-schooler, I tend to think that such people (espousing 1 and 2) should be thankful revolutionary feminism is no longer in vogue, or else we’d be hearing windows and car windscreens exploding and testicles hanging off street lamps at St Paul’s right now.
      No, Carina’s article is not a feminist rant. It’s a kindly gesture to those in charge to get the place in order. I’m not sure how young women at the colleges will take this sort of degrading abuse, but I wager it won’t be long. Treat people like sex toys and one day you’ll wake up after a big night of ‘play’ sans balls and all.

    • Tom says:

      03:11pm | 10/11/09

      I’m really grossed out by how defensive a lot of guys get about articles like this.

    • Glen says:

      03:23pm | 10/11/09

      Err, ok , it is a bit frustrating that intelligent people have to fall back on this neoliberal discourse of ‘choices’ wrapped up in the juridical discourse of ‘consent’ when Carina’s piece was not targetting either of these issues, as many people have pointed out. There is another way to think about it to hopefully drive home to the haters exactly why they appear to be so abhorrent to everyone else.
      These types of social gatherings are a social infrastructure to provide opportunities for fun. Sure it is within everyone’s power to choose whether or not they want to participate in these opportunities, and by doing so they impicitly give their consent to attend an event (without necessarily giving consent for specific acts). What other opportunities for fun are there for female students?
      Can everyone see when the terms of the issue are reconfigured in terms of opportunity, then the issue of ‘choice’ is irrelevant, if there are not ‘opportunities’ presented that are not primarily organised around the sexualisation of women’s bodies? Does the college really want to be known as the University iof Sydney social institution that serves as the infrastructure that provides young women with the opportunity to make ‘bad choices’? The mysoginistic dimension to this is when young men think it is their right to provide opportunities for young women to make bad choices.

    • Tim says:

      03:26pm | 10/11/09

      Awesome Remy,
      If you don’t treat women the way they want to be treated, they’ll cut off your balls.
      Ha ha, Grievous Bodily harm is funny.

    • whychange says:

      03:28pm | 10/11/09

      How surprising to see an issue being intellectualized by intellectuals! The simpler comments don’t stand a chance in the face of this. A lot of this debate seems to be one side trying to get the other to take responsibility. Bravo for talking about it, intellectuals, now what are you going to DO about it?

    • Emma says:

      03:33pm | 10/11/09

      I am so sick of people being given excuses for everything. Noone takes responsibility for their own actions anymore! If you dont want to go to a party, dont go, stand up for yourself and what you want.  It is just ridiculous to blame others for your own behaviour. Your life. Your choice.

    • E says:

      04:03pm | 10/11/09

      good article, couple of thoughts

      1) Its not about creating a culture where women are safe because nowhere is totally safe for anyone, its about stamping out a culture where sex offenders are safe. Its about making it dangerous to commit sexual assult or rape.

      2) This is apparently a 1st year O-Week experience, these girls are 17-19, often their first time away from parents (imagine the 18yo with a romantic heart, 18DD’s and legitimately protective parents) . The event is apparently being organised by more senior members of the college, given its on boys turf you can imagine the kind of predators who inveigled themselves onto the ‘Tight and White’ committee over summer! These men are providing a role model to the younger students. (We know there are older members of the college orchestrating the event due to its ‘traditional nature’, 1st years cant know tradition before being initiated into it!)
      3) Events funded by mandatory fees should not exclude anyone who has paid the fees, think of it Jewish and Islamic students being invited to a ‘pork and shellfish fiesta’ - not on 21C. The kids who choose not to attend for reasons of not being treated like a piece of meat, a biblical home entertainment system (on rental), those who choose to stay home that night, should get a pro-rata refund.
      4) Are the girls informed about what is expected of them a the party? (the hosing springs to mind)

      In conclusion, this is an event organised by senior members of the college, paid for by mandatory fees, at which sexual objectification of women is obviously pre-arranged (who brings the hose?).

      How hard was that?

    • Rachel says:

      04:07pm | 10/11/09

      What a great piece Carina! Thank you for putting forward some really practical ideas for addressing these issues.

      For everyone here - on ‘both’ sides of the argument - who are saying they are against violence against women in any and all contexts, please take action.

      Stand up and say so by taking the White Ribbon Oath:
      to Swear to never commit, never excuse and never be silent about violence against women.

      And encourage your friends to do the same.
      “All Aussie men should swear” - http://www.myoath.com.au (and http://www.whiteribbonday.org.au)

    • Graham says:

      04:16pm | 10/11/09

      Why not co-ed the colleges? Why single sex at such a relatively late development stage?

    • E says:

      04:19pm | 10/11/09

      If an Islamic student joins the college, does he/she get a refund for the money he put in for drinks? I mean if I’m not drinking, I’m not putting in for the slab.

    • Mick says:

      04:26pm | 10/11/09

      Raging generalisation.

    • fangfang says:

      04:28pm | 10/11/09

      Thanks Carina for the article. It is really good that you speak it out. For the people from other culture background, start discussions and bring them in the fore do shed new light on what is happening here and what others think about that. Say, something may has been taken for granted as part of WESTERN youth culture, especially for the culture outsiders, now is coming to shit, or at least knowing that there is a ground for shifting.

    • Rob says:

      04:35pm | 10/11/09

      A weak, feminist-friendly piece, getting uppity about a situation where both males and females are there by choice and just looking to have a good time. No one’s holding a gun to the heads of these girls to participate. Full stop.

    • Meaghan says:

      04:38pm | 10/11/09

      @ Emma: I was in one of these colleges almost 40 years ago (that’s at least how long this stuff has been happening) and I chose not to go to the parties. I was very lonely 18 year old, but yeah—my choice. However I did not “choose” to spend every Friday and Saturday night locked in my room feeling scared while college boys rampaged through kicking at the doors, and I didn’t “choose” to listen to other girls screaming—really screaming—at them to get out. The article is not just about that photo. It’s about how women sometimes CAN’T choose what happens in a violent culture.

    • Bryce Ives says:

      04:40pm | 10/11/09

      Spot on Carina, I absolutley agree.

    • ag says:

      04:49pm | 10/11/09

      Well put Carina, and thanks for a sane and intelligent response in the wake of some fairly disturbing revelations. What I like is that you have given us a feel for the context that allows things like this ‘anti-consent’ group to seem normal and legitimate to those who participate, and the way in which its just not as simple as choosing to reject that culture for those who inhabit it.

      You’ve also given some pretty simple suggestions for maybe improving the situation, and I note that this is somewhere that Sydney colleges are behind those at other unis, and really have no excuse for not making these changes.

    • Kristian says:

      04:50pm | 10/11/09

      @whychange Talking is doing. Writing an article in a widely read blog is doing something. It makes public what was previously secret.

      As the saying goes, the first step to solving a problem is admitting there is one.

      And why would you presume that the author and others are not doing anything else?

    • Eric says:

      04:52pm | 10/11/09

      Yet more misandry from The Punch.

      Why are you too scared to present an alternative point of view that doesn’t preach hatred of men?

    • stephen says:

      04:53pm | 10/11/09

      I feel sorry fer you ‘yoongsters’ (as Tony Greig would say.)
      When we did that with the ladies at Uni’, there wasn’t a camera within coo-ee.

    • pollyemj says:

      04:54pm | 10/11/09

      Carina, this article is excellent! It explains better than I ever could the nuances of a culture at Sydney Uni residential colleges that was to all intents and purposes fun and festive but tinged with an undercurrent of misogyny. I’m a ex-college girl and those three years were some of the best of my life and free from incident, but I do believe that my choices - about friends, boyfriends, drinks and parties - at the time were influenced by a desire to be compliant with the dominant cultural norm. A norm which once you move on from college and into the real world you realise is pretty unique to its closed environment. It was a priviledge to attend both uni and college, one I believe only a small minority unfortunately take for granted.

    • Chase Stevens says:

      05:04pm | 10/11/09

      If these women have chosen to go to these parties and are well aware of the activities that happen (as you pointed out it is written or some such) then they are responsible for any activities they do or do not participate in.

      The notion that they do so purely out of peer pressure is absurd, this is not high school these people are adults and must act and be treated as such. They have the ability to say ‘no I will not go’ as much as they have the ability to say ‘yes I will go’.

      This is a simple matter of choice. These ‘opportunities’ exist only because women willingly go to them. No women, no booze up, no problem.

      Of course women aren’t the only ones to blame here: Let’s not be stupid.

      Men also need to take responsibility for their actions. Whilst ultimately the woman’s choice is the reason that she is there, the male participants need to be making sure that each and every woman there is comfortable with what is happening. After all this is the men’s event, they did invite the women.

      The solution in any case is to stop treating women like they are precious. They have the ability to say no, just like any other person. They are not the ‘weaker’ sex. This is not the 1950’s after all.

      Similarly males behaviour needs to stop being dismissed under the ‘boys will be boys’ banner. They need to be forced to realise how their behaviours affect others. They also need to be forced to respect others decisions, not just women, but everyone. 

      Dammit this had better be published.

    • Chris says:

      05:06pm | 10/11/09

      Just how does holding the ‘tight and white’ activity promote the College aims “To be a place of civilised life ... To express the historic Christian tradition of faith and worship in a critical and informed Anglican manner, appropriate to a University setting”? I must have missed that part of the Anglican tradition.

      Will the Diocese of Sydney and Archibishop Jensen accept responsibility for the holding of this event in their institution and ensure that it, or similar activities, are not repeated?

    • nicky says:

      05:11pm | 10/11/09

      Hmm one thing which always mystifies me about debates such as this is that those who disagree seem so intent on immediately insulting the author:

      “you just sat in your room throughout your whole college life slaving to be a D-grade journalist”

      “I’m well out of college now, but inaccurate ramblings like this just shit me. “

      “suppose your one of those people who think homosexuality should be illegal to, cause it could lead to phetaphielia “

      The article is a think piece - yes it intellectuailizes (is that even a word?) the issue, but that’s the point of it. Ranting and attacking the author is about as logical as whining about NRL commentators for not talking about soccer.

      It s really simple, if you object to intellectual debate, why waste your time reading the article…. what s the point in aiming personal attacks at the author - it’s irrelevent .

      Maybe this is more your cup of tea

      http://www.dailytelegraph.com.au

      and as for the actual content of the counter arguments - most of them miss the actual point of the article (with the exception of Alex who provided a thoughful response).

    • Catharine Lumby says:

      05:27pm | 10/11/09

      Terrific piece Carina. And highly constructive. As someone who went to law school with a couple examples of aggressively anti-feminist college boys and who later heard extremely disturbing stories from young women I taught at Sydney Uni about the worst of college life I congratulate you on having the courage to stick your neck out and write this piece. Naturally, the initial reaction of a lot of people with an investment in the old culture will be denial and anger directed at people like you who dare to speak out. But sunlight is the ultimate disinfectant and I have strong hunch that you’ll get the pleasure of seeing the kind of changes you’re calling for put into place.

    • Johnny says:

      05:44pm | 10/11/09

      I feel sorry for all the admin at all the Sydney Uni Colleges who for many years have been attempting to eradicate all the ‘boys club’ notions. The fact that the media has got hold of this and sensationalised it to such an extent concerns me.

    • Carl Palmer says:

      06:29pm | 10/11/09

      “Men initiate men into a world of disrespecting women and bad behaviour from the moment they arrive at college”.

      In relation to the disrespect “from the moment they arrive” – so all of their upbringing at home will be totally ignored when they arrive at Uni. All of those “values” taught by their parents will be ignored? Not suggesting that they will be angles but this is a long bow. If what you say is true – then I’d say that whoever their guardian was for the previous 18 – 19 years screwed up real bad.  Having said that, disrespecting another human being is not acceptable.

      Also

      “Education should not be about policing….***legal consumption of alcohol***, but about how to treat other people with dignity and respect.”

      Hang on here!!! I thought alcohol was in the vast majority of cases the cause of this behaviour. Lots of alcohol + young men + young women = high likelihood of trouble. They are drinking alcohol in what is effectively is their own pub and you can guarantee that shit WILL happen. Why is anyone surprised? I’m not. This will happen whether it’s at Uni or at a pub or club.

      Take away the alcohol and let us see what happens. 

      In relation to peer pressure – they didn’t experience peer pressure previously and it’s going to disappear after they leave college? Someone’s on the magic bus.

      These young men and women need to take responsibility for their actions because when they leave there is a bigger and badder world that awaits them and they need to grow up quickly. As my wife said to our daughters (one did go to Syd Uni) – boys will be boys and girls will become mothers.

    • Alex says:

      06:34pm | 10/11/09

      Fantastic piece. Colleges breed insensitive men and encourage women to lower their self worth through some truly awful practicesm hiding behind the facade of tradition and status. About time people knew what was occurring behind closed doors. College administrations have much to answer for.

    • Sam says:

      07:00pm | 10/11/09

      I enjoyed this piece very much. I went to a private boys’ school in Brisbane and was always absolutely appalled at the culture that seemed to be ingrained. An all-male environment tends to perpetuate disrespect towards women with the boys having a jolly good laugh. While the women at these parties might be there by choice, the women that these bred sexists encounter in the workplace and society at large did not sign up for sexual harassment.

      This article is not about ruining the “fun” of a bunch of university newcomers, it’s about stopping the culture of misogyny associated with elite educational and social institutions. Those who think that this is an article about a party have completely missed the point.

    • Belinda says:

      07:07pm | 10/11/09

      I can’t imagine you’d go to a party called “Tight and White” and be surprised by any of this going on.
      As an 18-year-old I may have gone and had a laugh, or if I had felt uncomfortable - get this! - I would have left. I probably wouldn’t have been impressed with being doused in water. But again, the name of the party is a bit of a tip-off.
      The thing I find most offensive about this article is the implication that naive girls are somehow tricked into doing what the boys want them to do, that they don’t have freewill. Teaching daughters that they do indeed have the ability to make their own decisions is surely a more important and practical move than banning partying.

    • MarlaR says:

      07:16pm | 10/11/09

      I wish more men and women were reading about this issue and thinking more along the lines of “this really makes me mad / sad, and I am going to do something positive today to stop violence against women”, rather than some of the “this is why its not so bad / not our problem / not all about us”.

      @Kristian - you’re right - you are either for sexual assault or you are against it. There is no black and white.

    • Boris says:

      07:35pm | 10/11/09

      I’m bewildered at the amount of women who think that personal responsibility is wavered when faced with peer pressure. If you don’t wish to participate in these parties - DO NOT ATTEND.

      Would you use that same logic in court? Do you think “I’m sorry judge, my friends peer pressured me into murdering someone, so it’s not my fault.” would fly? Of course not.

    • Stephen says:

      07:42pm | 10/11/09

      It has nothing to do with the fact they are being forced to go, most comentors so far have been to narrow minded to see the what this article is really about. The article is saying women in college’s aren’t forced to attend these events, they are put under incredible amounts of peer pressure to attend these events and to let themselves be treated in this way in order to fit in to college life, a cycle of elitist behaviour and dis-respect to woman that has been going on for decades, and is now just a given part of college life. And peer pressure is undeniable, in this day and age peer pressure is an identifiable problem that has terrible ramifications, mostly highlighted by the media in highschool cases, but it also occurs in University’s especially with young students still in a high school mind set, who will follow the behavior of older students in order to fit into college life and be accepted by the group. This is true of both the women being dis-respected and the boys doing the dis-respecting.

    • J Bollocks says:

      08:12pm | 10/11/09

      Nice… Hope all commenters “this is Ok” have daughters….

      Freaks

    • Sen says:

      08:14pm | 10/11/09

      I think people assume ‘choice’ is unproblematic when it clearly is. As Sam M and feministromantic have pointed out, the article is not suggesting that women are naive and victimised subjects who are ‘forced’ into these situations. Instead, the point is more sophisticated, trying to address the broader cultural influences in which women make such ‘choices’. It is necessary to address the history of these colleges and the history of how women are often positioned in these patriarchal spaces as objects or commodities. This is not to suggest that all women lack agency, instead it is pointing to the fact that not everyone has the same capacity to ‘choose’ in a cultural environment which is largely sexist. As mentioned earlier, the ‘choices’ for people trying to ‘fit in’, coming into a space which is often characterised by a ‘boys club mentality’, are coercive and this needs to be addressed. How is trying to get people to think about the cultural influences under which they make choices, and trying to put in place an ethics or policy to address concerns of sexual harassment a ‘feminist rant’? People who keep using ‘choice’ as a blanket statement to refute all claims or to promote a ‘feminist agenda’ are missing the underlying issues.

    • Kia says:

      09:00pm | 10/11/09

      @ J Bollocks…I have a daughter and I hope to god I raise her to have a bit more self respect that the girl sprawled all over the bar in this photo.  I also would like to think that she wouldn’t feel the need to be a sheep and be “peer pressured” (what a cop out of an excuse that is for an ADULT to make a CHOICE) into attending something such as this.

    • whychange says:

      10:01pm | 10/11/09

      @ christian, @nicki: If you re-read my comment, you will see I applaud the talk - or did you think that was sarcasm? I have a doctorate, and can intellecetualize with the best of them, but my concern here is that the talk is not enough on its own, and in fact risk alienating the very people who you need to convert here. The people at the top of this chain who had the shorter, less ‘reflective’ comments are the ones who need to be brought onside if this is to change. I don’t work at USyd nor do i study there, but i gather the author and some of you commenters do, and you haven’t answered my question - what are you going to do (in addition to talking)?

    • Feminist-Uni-Student says:

      10:26pm | 10/11/09

      Good piece!
      There is no way that student fees should be going towards funding activities that promote the sexualisation of women and other unacceptable behaviour.

    • collegeboysrule says:

      10:48pm | 10/11/09

      i will be the first to admit college guys are gay as sh*t and the whole group mentality thing is pathetic.. most are a bunch of misfit nerds from private schools who have had a second chance to redeem themselves by banding together…
      but the parties they throw, and who attends them is purely by choice.. these people are over 18 and can make a decision for themselves.. if you dont like what they are doing then block your ears and cover your eyes you complaining idiot.. its uni, people are out to have fun and a good time.. and if that mean some chick wants a guy sucking shots off her half naked body then so be it…

      Next time write about something with a bit of meaning

    • Doug says:

      01:14am | 11/11/09

      So I assume that everyone supporting this article has a similar view on pornography. I mean really, whats the difference between this and pornography? Your argument is that women are being used as sex objects. Yet the same thing is done to thousands of women everyday around the world. Why isn’t anyway complaining about that?

      Because it’s much easier to target a small institution like a university colleges rather than the entire porn industry, yet you get the same satisfaction from it. I think that is the real problem that is, the whole ‘sex sells’ concerto is the main reason why women are being oppressed in society today. If women were not being treated as sex objects on TV, radio, and the Internet all the time then maybe society would respect them more.

      But back on topic if I may. If I had a daughter, knowing that she did this would mildly upset me, but it would be a brush off the shoulder compared to finding out that she was a prostitute or, generally, just a women of loose morals. I’m sure no parents would be eternally scarred if their daughter exhibited such behavior.

    • Asl says:

      09:07am | 11/11/09

      As a Sydney University student currently at college, I’d like to direct you to the comments by ‘tina’ SHE gets it. While yes, there is a need for a revision of the treatment of women in certain situations, the media has misled the general public about the degree to which sexism permeates the college environment, it exists, it needs to change but it is not everywhere, all the time and it is not always so clear.
      The shades of grey concerning the treatment of women in Australian society are the same ones at college, this not black and white. I’d like to point out that this is not a problem isolated within Pauls or ‘all female colleges’. While co-ed colleges (Andrews, Johns, Wesley) have changed some of the attitude towards women, women within these colleges are not regarded as quite equal, nor are women fom other colleges afforded the same respect.
      On a side note, perhaps we could divorce this argument from yet another attack on ‘elite’ private schools- I am from the country, I went to a government school, I am on scholarship and so are many of my friends, its difficult to generalise the mix of people at these colleges.

    • Asl says:

      09:09am | 11/11/09

      Sorry I’d also make you all aware that the girls in this image, and the majority who attended this party were from a co-ed college, proabably with parents like “Kia” who raised them to apparently have more self-respect.

    • Ka. says:

      09:32am | 11/11/09

      Wow, to most of the comments on this article.

      Thanks for highlighting exactly why women feel pressured to behave in this way, and furthermore, afraid to speak out about it. Good work guys!

      /sarcasm.

      Instead of fighting to show how sexually liberated and modern you are by commenting in the basic vein of ‘get over it’, how about you look outside your little boxes and actually put some thought into the implications of the acts mentioned in this article? If women are shown that if they aren’t willing to do this, say this, act this way, then they won’t be invited, accepted, etc - then that is a problem. But you guys stay in your little box and ignore the big issue, enjoy reality when it smacks you in the face when it’s YOUR teenage daughter crying her heart out.

    • Tim says:

      09:49am | 11/11/09

      @Sen,
      while your looking at all these underlying issues you’re missing the main game. Your assertion that all choices are not equal means very little. Every decision we make in life is coerced and pressured to some degree. Where do we draw the line at what level of coercion is OK?
      Everyone has to take personal responsibility for their own actions, otherwise we will end up with a society where someone else is always to blame.
      Oh wait a minute…...

    • Nico says:

      09:51am | 11/11/09

      All the comments referring to free will among women who choose to attend these parties etc ignore the pressure a culture of sexualisation and objectification places on anyone - men and women - to behave in a certain way. College life can be accompanied by enormous peer pressure, expectations to fit in and so on, very few people in that situation would be willing to buck the trend and express their discomfort with everyday sexism. And perhaps they don’t see a problem with it - but that doesn’t make it right, or the sort of culture society as a whole should encourage. It just means misogyny has been normalised to a whole generation of young people.

    • Julie says:

      10:00am | 11/11/09

      Oh my goodness, so many commentator’s here I want to slap.  The idiocy is astounding. 
      Doug - This has nothing to do with porn - the porn I watch is made by consenting adults.  There is nothing consensual about sexual assault.  Do you not get that?  You’d rather your daughter was out having a good time and had a sexual experience that she didn’t want (yes that would be sexual assault) than making the decision to be a hooker and earn lots of money by screwing people where she could chose the when/where & who?  That’s completely screwed up man.  I’m glad I’m not your daughter.

      Right there is the problem - you can be a good time party girl as long as you’re not a slut.  If you are a slut you deserve whatever you get.  If you’re drunk you deserve what you get, however if you’re a party bloke who’s drunk then you have no responsibility, it’s the woman’s fault.  No wonder so many women who are sexually assaulted don’t report it. 
      Oh and Angela, I can’t believe that you’re actually a female living in the 21st Century.

    • Claire says:

      10:25am | 11/11/09

      I think this is an interesting article, and it’s a shame that the commenters have gotten caught up in talking about the “tight and white” party and picture, which together were really just an opening anecdote.  At the risk of pushing this diversion further:  I’ve noticed that dismissive commenters have split largely into the “don’t be such a prude” camp or the “you deserve what you get” camp on this concept.  This makes it clear to me that a woman who might willingly have shots drunk off her body, which some people regard as youthful hijinks and others regard as wonton debauchery, will have a very hard time having her claims taken seriously if she is later subjected to further sexual behaviour that she does not consent to.  The comments above are proof.  And I wonder, does a college which is part of a respected educational institution consider it appropriate to fund parties which foster such an environment?

    • Freddo says:

      10:29am | 11/11/09

      Umm Julie,
      Can you point me to a comment above which says sexual assault against females is OK?
      Must be those damn invisible comments again.

    • Shama says:

      10:35am | 11/11/09

      @Tim 9:49 am

      Re level of coercion, surely if you harm someone it matters.  Bullies coerce people but you cannot shift all the blame on to the victim.  People use violence to coerce other people - again you can’t blame the person enduring the violence.  It’s the same with sexual assault.  The opposite of blaming other people for your ills is not to go off and say everything that happens to a person is because they invited it.

      I think someone up here mentioned that men must understand that decency is not wrong.  I am quite sure there are plenty of decent men around but somehow the message boards always seem to be full of men defending bad behaviour on the part of their sex.

    • Mary says:

      10:34am | 11/11/09

      I personally think that this issue as reported in the media has spiralled out of control. The “pro-rape” page as it is now referred to did not intend to incite sexual assualt. It was a silly name for a sporting team. Yes, I think the name was extremely disrespectful and disgusting, especially towards victims of assualt. However, i do not think that these young men who, besides the one mistake of satirizing a very serious issue, should be expelled from college. The attacks from the media seem to be a punishment enough.

      I would also like to point out that in my time at college I have had the priviledge of forming friendships with men from St Paul’s College. From my experience with these boys they are gentlemen and hold women in the highest regard. I have certainly never been made to feel inferior because of my sex nor have I ever felt uncomfortable or threatened by being alone with them. I do not mean to suggest that the myriad claims of assault and misogyny are therefore untrue. But I think it is impossible for society to condemn one college for individual incidents that occured in multiple colleges (some events did not even include Pauls Boys) and over a substantial period of time. Sexual assault and general mistreatment of women is not part of the “college experience” rather, they are misfortunate events that happened while experiencing college. I think the public (especially those who have not experienced college and therefore have no source of information besides the some-what sensationalised media) need to keep this in mind when forming their opinions of residential halls.

      On the other hand I think that a sexual assualt and harrassment policy could do nothing but good. There are, as I have previously said, incidents of misogyny and assault which could be addressed through a policy which condemns all attitudes which can result in a terrifying experience for another student.

      Finally, O-week is a series of events that have traditionally included messy nights, terrible dancing and general sillyness. This is to be expected when you combine around 500 overexcited students who are beginning their college experience. This doesnt have to be an issue. There are dry events for those who do not wish to participate in events such as Tight and White and the Rubix Cube. There are also multiple events which do not include “partying” behaviour such as the Paul’s Cellar Lunch which is nothing more than a nice meal, some entertainment from the talented freshmen and croquet. No college student is ever made to drink or do participate in any activity they are not comfortable with. Some people (myself included) love the events provided in o-week as everyone there is having fun while getting to know each other. And for those who are uncomfortable with these events have alternative events which they can attend.

    • Tim Alen says:

      10:45am | 11/11/09

      I think this problem is systematic of the exploitation and devaluing of women inherent in the capitalist system. Capitalism devalues the contribution women make to society through failing to account for the contribution they make - they perform far more unpaid work than men from child birth to domestic chores etc. It is not a problem of the colleges, but just the inherent result of the evils of the capitalist economy.

    • Tim says:

      11:10am | 11/11/09

      @Shama,
      of course actual violence is wrong. I don’t think anyone on this board has said incidences of assault or sexual assault are acceptable. Any forced behaviour through threat of violence is not what i would call choice. I am talking about peer pressure where say someone is coerced to do something they might otherwise not have done (having shots or a wet tshirt contest). I would say there is an obvious choice there of participating or not.
      People saying that they would be socially ostracised if they don’t participate is a cop out for their own decisions.

    • Justin says:

      11:17am | 11/11/09

      The attitudes to uni life in Aus are an interesting contrast to the attitudes to college life in the US. This kind of thing seems to be more prevalent there (purely anecdotally), but there seems to be a more relaxed attitude to it.

      Same goes for the behaviour of professional footballers. The NFL in the US has taken the attitude that what happens off the field is none of their business unless it steps over the line in to relatively major illegality. Willie Mason would be a cleanskin.

      We’re often portrayed as being more laid back than the conservative uptight US, but this would seem to contradict that. Maybe our attitude is right & theirs is wrong, or maybe (heaven forbid) we are too uptight about this.

      Either way, I’m sure the NSW Government is already working some inept laws to “fix” it - that’s their go.

    • Shama says:

      11:33am | 11/11/09

      @Tim 11:10am

      If it is simply everyone having fun, it’s a different thing.  I think Carina mentioned in her article that she has come across instances where things have turned bad and also that sexual assault is underreported.  Also a girl might go to the party expecting it to be just a spot of fun. If things go wrong, it remains often unreported because it is seen as a case of inviting it on yourself.  It’s a fine line then - a person may go of their own free will but the events after that may be a result of coercion - which is clearly wrong.  I think Carina’s point was that in the present culture the possibility of things going wrong is high as is the possibility that peer pressure enforces a silence.

    • Estelle Noonan says:

      01:10pm | 11/11/09

      To ‘collegeboysrule’: “if you don’t like what they are doing then block your ears and cover your eyes” is the very sentiment that makes it so vital for authors such as Garland to speak out around the issue of sexual assault. As the author highlights, the personal challenges encountered by victims when considering reporting sexual assault are compounded in residential colleges. Re your accusation that Garland is “complaining”, her piece goes well beyond the expression of dissatisfaction and engages thoroughly with the necessity for changes to the college environment. Of all the pieces I have read on this subject thus far, Garland is the most detailed and articulate in her description of the material changes to sexual harassment policy and procedure in the colleges that must be undertaken in order to protect college women from sexual assault. Well done, Carina, this is a vitally important contribution to the current debate.

    • Chris Inness says:

      03:06pm | 11/11/09

      Firstly it is important to remember is that this culture within colleges is dominate but not the entirety of the students. I am sure that there is a group of guys that are horrified by the dealings of their fellow students.

      In addition this is true of the Australian Society. This attitude of sex is not deeply ingrained into Australian Culture (even global western culture)!!!

      I was a male college student. I lived on campus in a co-ed college for a number of years at UQ and the behaviour of male students is no different there. Nudie runs, published sex activity, awards for the most sexually active students.
      One of to things is happening here either the College Wardens are oblivious to it or they are turning a blind eye to it. Personally I believe it to be the later. It has certainly proved the old phase “What you don’t know can’t hurt you” WRONG!!

      As a male college student I did not value it nor did I accept it. What this leaves you in college is a social outcast.

      What I believe has happened in the recent years is a devaluing of sex. Sex in today’s culture is for selfish gain, personal pleasure and gratification. It is not about intimacy or marriage but is more so treated as a sport. How many touch downs has the next person scored.

      Sex is pleasurable.
      Sex is normal.

      BUT

      Sex is not about self.  It is special and what has been lost in our current culture is a value of sex.

      As for the fix?
      Not to be negative but I am not sure that it is possible. The reason is that this is so deeply ingrained into our culture and when it comes to culture it comes from each human heart. The human heart can be fixed but most people reject the fix for the human heart.

    • ... says:

      04:07pm | 11/11/09

      Just putting it out there - the Facebook group was actually just a group for the members of the Pauls football team ‘define statutory’ as in ‘we’re going to rape (win against) the other teams. Funny how much anger has been sparked by journalists taking things out of proportion.

      That said, I hope some things do change in the college environment, as a girl currently at college.  I have never been put in an uncomfortable situation, nor have any of my friends, but the objectification is unreal.

    • jhmiltonwa says:

      04:24pm | 11/11/09

      You’re probably making some good points amongst the bad ones but I got this far..

      “I’m now a PhD student researching girls and women. “

      ...and i stopped.

    • Jason says:

      07:31pm | 11/11/09

      The non-student equivalent of “white and tight” happens pretty much every night on the city streets and in clubs.  Women dress in skimpy, revealing outfits by choice.  I’m not saying they are asking to be assaulted, but really they are fully aware of the impact of “tits and arse” and they use it to the fullest to find the guy they want, or simply to impress other females.

      To say this is driven by some sort of “boys club” mentality ignores the fact that women in our society are highly empowered and have much more protection in the law than do men.

      Feminism should stop worry about western culture and start trying to bring Asian and Middle Eastern cultures up to the western standards.  Much much worse things happen to women in other countries, but we seem to ignore them for trivial stuff like uni life here.

    • Eric says:

      08:20pm | 11/11/09

      So it seems this entire “scandal” was just a media beat-up over nothing.

      Gee, I wish there were some honest journalists who would expose this.

      But, sadly, “honest journalist” is a contradiction in terms.

    • Adriane says:

      12:59am | 12/11/09

      Carina, I applaud you!

      Re: Tim@Sen: The underlying assumptions are running the “main game”.
      “Your assertion that all choices are not equal means very little” - These women are not in an equal position to make their choices. I don’t understand how that is not an issue.

      The point has been made many times now = choice is not something black and white. It is not about direct coercion, it is the influences on these decisions. There are an overwhelming amount of comments that, like Tim, suggest “everyone has to take personal responsibility for their own actions”. The women are adults and they chose to be there, there is no issue. Peer pressure is irrelevant, an excuse.

      These are young adults and in a closed in society like these colleges the pressure to be involved in this social scene is tantamount. After reading the above comments there have even been a couple that condemn those who do not attend these gatherings or insinuate that not attending them means sitting in your room, being boring etc. This is not pressure? These colleges are home to many students and if by choosing not to attend these parties lands them with a damaging social stigma, where can they go to escape it? All these testaments simply asserting that these women need to be responsibel for their own actions seem to be missing the fact that these kinds of parties are still being organised, these situations are being glamourised, even deemed necessary if you want to ‘have a life’ at college. (And no, not necessary in the implicit sense - once again, it is more complicated than that). This constant call for college women as adults to take responsibilty seems to be something symptomatic of our desire to blame the victim. She went to the party, she knew what she was getting into, what went on. SHE should alter HER behaviour if she doesn’t like it.

      (Well then, as a woman I had better alter my behaviour and not walk home at night, or even go home, or wear any clothing that reveals that I am a woman, that I have a female body. I am bound to get some kind of attention based on my body as something sexual, but I knew what I was getting myself into)

      Carina’s article is calling for the institution and those that are running it to step up and take responsibilty for THEIR own actions and not fall behind the “boys will be boys” excuse. It can’t always be the victim’s fault all the time, in fact it never should be.
      If women (or men for that matter) go to these events, take responsibilty for the fact that it was their decision to go and are still harassed or assaulted, what then?

      And to the other claim that it is a “societal problem” and the the article “targets colleges”:
      if we do not attempt to address this kind of issue in some of the institutions that form our society, how can we address this societal problem?
      It is already upsetting that many, many, many victims of sexual assault do not feel that they can come forward. At the risk of targeting the college, I would have to say that at least in the larger society, there are laws, networks, support groups that encourage victims to come forward and offer support. And there is still such a low report rate.
      There is no framework or policy in place to deal with college harassment is, To proudly paraphrase Carina’s article, this is shocking. In the already sloe-knit college institution, there is no opportunity for those who feel they have been sexually assaulted to come forward.
      I hope this wonderful article helps you to realise you have a voice, that can and is being heard.

    • Leah says:

      05:10pm | 12/11/09

      There are plenty of college students, male and female, who choose not to participate in these activities, and they still manage to have good reputations, friends, and a social life.

      Yes the guys involved in these activities are fostering a sexist attitude but that’s about it. Nobody is assaulting or abusing anyone (usually), girls aren’t forced to be there, it’s (usually) consensual, etc etc.

    • Elle says:

      01:06pm | 16/11/09

      I can’t believe how many people actually disagree with this article . How do you know what really is going on there? these women are so insecure and want to belong they would do anything. And these men are seriously screwed up.

 

Punch live

Up to the minute Twitter chatter

Paul Colgan

@MClarke23 nip out of camp to help out Warney? Now that would cause some chaos

Lucy Kippist

@SimonThomsen LOL you can try!

Lucy Kippist

Don't bring your children and other "rules" of supermarket shopping. Got a gripe or two of your own? Add to my list: http://bit.ly/dBWydm

Lucy Kippist

What voters really think of Tony Abbott, great piece by Nic Christensen & Tina Tek: http://bit.ly/bvLWSz#thepunch

Gentle jabs to the ribs

Breaking news: Something is going on

Breaking news: Something is going on

Is this the greatest ever send-up of 24-hour news? Warning: contains strong language and hilarity. From… Read more

10 comments

Newsletter

Read all about it

Sign up to the free daily Punch newsletter