Conclusions
From these interviews, I have come to the conclusion that anti-rape advocacy and activism through a student-activist lens and through a staff lens, while somewhat differently constrained, result in fundamentally the same desires:
- Center the people most impacted by sexual violence in the discussion and drafting of policies.
- Advocate for more funding to support resources for those impacted by sexual violence.
- Funding for preventative education.
Evaluating what I have gathered from these interviews and accompanying articles, there have been changes to Ohio State culture around sexual assault awareness and prevention. Moreover, changes by students or staff within Ohio State can make campus a more supportive space for survivors of sexual violence. Yet, Ohio State cannot combat this issue alone. No additional changes or reforms within the university can really eliminate the root of the problem, which starts much younger than university-age students. Calls to action, such as Lewie’s to get more people involved with politics, are a through-way to possibly utilizing a human rights framework to uplift survivors of sexual violence and to inform future policies. However, it must be noted that utilizing a human rights framework in this way remains reliant on State power and institutions. While neither Pierano nor Lewie suggested working beyond these limitations, one must critically consider if these systems of government can actually work and enact changes when they are perpetrators of violence themselves.
