There were multiple different topics for each group’s deliberations. However, I decided to go to a deliberation that was on the same topic my group had chose; Sexual Assault on Campus. The reason for attending a similar deliberation was due to the fact that I already had knowledge on the topic from the research I had done for our deliberation, that I felt I could really engage in conversation and even give out facts if needed. Another reason was to be able to compare this group’s deliberation to my own.
I attended “Take Back Our Campus: How Can We Prevent Sexual Assault at Penn State?” on March 2nd. To start off, the difference in presentation stood out the most. Instead of in a formal looking room, their deliberation took place in Webster’s Book Store where there is a small coffee shop and the audience was a lot closer together. This group decided that instead of just speaking at the audience, we would break up in to small groups, with a member from this deliberation helping out and talking to each group. I felt this was a lot more personal and gave everyone the chance to give their input and opinions. It seemed less scary to speak your thoughts to a small group in a very informal setting, as opposed to speaking in front of a room full of people who are just staring at you. I feel that this form of deliberation helped the audience to be more engaged and truly understand what the subject of the matter was.
Their first approach focuses on alcohol, something that my group touched upon but never truly got in to detail. They asked us questions such as whether we thought alcohol was the biggest contributing factor in sexual assault, one that everyone agreed to. We then talked about ways that we could prevent the consumption of alcohol leading to assault. Our group came up with the ideas of the buddy system and never leaving our friends alone for even a second. My group’s deliberation spoke about alcohol maybe for a brief second, but we never went in depth with how alcohol causes sexual assault, which I felt was a very relatable and engaging topic for their deliberation.
The next approach was about things we can to do take better precautions. My deliberation group did not really engage in conversation of what we can do specifically on campus to stop assault, we mostly spoke about what we currently do and how people feel about these precautions. My group at this deliberation came up with some very creative ideas. Our biggest and most safe idea was allowing Safe Walk to adopt golf carts, that way the wait for a “walker” would not be as long and having someone following behind you every step would not be as creepy. We also thought about setting up more blue lights, as there are barely any on campus. This approach was possibly my favorite because everyone opened up more about their feelings towards our campus policy on sexual assault and how we feel Penn State is not doing enough to fix the problem.
The third approach focused on just exactly what Penn State was doing and how their rules affected the students. I feel that this really tied each approach together. Although my deliberation group did the same topic, we took an entirely different approach than this group. I feel we each correctly touched upon the topic, but in different ways that truly engaged the audience. Personally, this topic is extremely important to me and I want to be able to do whatever I can, along with my peers, to lower the rate and eventually prevent sexual assault on campus.