I attended two other deliberations after my group had our own: “Me 2, You 2, We All Want 2 Reduce Sexual Assault” and “Happy Hour Valley: Thinking about Drinking.” I enjoyed attending both deliberations, and I was glad to be a part of some very important conversations on campus. I think the students in each group did a very fine job.

The first deliberation I attended was  “Me 2, You 2, We All Want 2 Reduce Sexual Assault” which was a discussion on the best potential ways to reduce sexual assault, especially pertaining to our campus. Their three approaches were education, consequences, and what to do on our campus. We had a very good discussion on education and especially pertaining to teaching consent at a young age. It was generally agreed upon that teaching even simple consent at a young age could be very proactive and beneficial. In terms of consequences, the group was generally torn. Some people suggest that perpetrators of sexual assault deserve severe punishment and jail, including a permanent registration of being a sex offender. Others said that a permanent label of being a sex offender may be too harsh. Generally, we did agree upon the fact that different cases should be treated differently dependent on the severity of the harm done to the victim. Then we talked about resources on campus, or in schools in general, and that faculty and teachers need to be informed about how to effectively help survivors of sexual assault. We talked about how CAPS is a good resource, but some people may feel uncomfortable with it or not aware of its effectiveness, and that maybe, they should do more to advertise their services for students to be aware of.

The second deliberation I attended was “Happy Hour Valley: Thinking about Drinking.” This deliberation was centered around the drinking culture on our campus and what changes might need to be made to make a more pleasurable environment. They focused on drinking education and safety, consequences, and the negative effects that drinking can have on our community. There was a lot of discussion centered around the idea that (underage) drinking cannot possibly be monitored completely, because it would simply be impossible. Therefore, the focus on consequences and policing drunks should be on those who are causing severe distress or harm to themselves or others. We also agreed upon the fact that the education currently setup to prevent dangerous drinking is generally ineffective and should be made more enjoyable and informative in order to increase its effectiveness. I really likes how this group structured their deliberation as opposed to the other. This group had a very large attendance, so in order to combat this, they split up the large group into three smaller groups to go over each approach. Then, after the three approaches, we summarized our smaller discussions as a whole. I found this to be more effective than the other group, who also had a large attendance, that had the discussion as a whole group, in a small space. Overall, I enjoyed the experience of attending deliberations and having this community style discussion on important topics concerning our campus and the greater State College area.