From Slate Magazine · Christel Trutmann · · 2m
Cornell Case Exposes Consent Language Limits
Snapchat messages from Cornell fraternity reveal how consent language fails to protect victims.
In brief
Snapchat messages from Cornell fraternity reveal how consent language fails to protect victims. The Cornell fraternity case shows how current consent frameworks ignore perpetrator responsibility and victim autonomy. Originally reported by Slate Magazine.
Cornell fraternity lawsuit
A former Cornell student filed a lawsuit alleging seven Chi Phi fraternity members drugged and raped her in October 2024.
“A former Cornell student filed a lawsuit alleging seven Chi Phi fraternity members drugged and raped her in October 2024”
Tompkins County DA reopens case
The Tompkins County district attorney reopened the investigation after declining to bring charges two years ago.
“The Tompkins County district attorney reopened the investigation after declining to bring charges two years ago”
Author's background
The author graduated from Cornell, worked on emergency services, and studied sexual misconduct with adolescent boys in treatment.
“The author graduated from Cornell, worked on emergency services, and studied sexual misconduct with adolescent boys in treatment”
Snapchat messages condemned
Fraternity members allegedly sent Snapchat messages including 'free pussy' and 'shop still open?'
“Fraternity members allegedly sent Snapchat messages including 'free pussy' and 'shop still open?'”
DA dismisses messages as irrelevant
The district attorney said the messages were 'disgusting and vulgar and immoral' but 'did not have any relevance to whether Jane Doe consented'.
“The district attorney said the messages were 'disgusting and vulgar and immoral' but 'did not have any relevance to whether Jane Doe consented'”
Consent language problem
Current consent frameworks focus on victim decisions rather than perpetrator responsibility for verifying consent.
“Current consent frameworks focus on victim decisions rather than perpetrator responsibility for verifying consent”
Solicitude proposed
Solicitude asks 'what do you want right now?' and consensus asks 'what do we both want?' to create symmetrical relationships.
“Solicitude asks 'what do you want right now?' and consensus asks 'what do we both want?' to create symmetrical relationships”
Solicitude requires care
Solicitude demands care to find out and honor what a partner wants without mind-reading or paternalism.
“Solicitude demands care to find out and honor what a partner wants without mind-reading or paternalism”
Intoxication impact
Alcohol impairs judgment and perception, making it harder to verify consent and understand a partner's needs.
“Alcohol impairs judgment and perception, making it harder to verify consent and understand a partner's needs”
Brock Turner example
Brock Turner's blood alcohol content was double the legal limit during his sexual assault of Chanel Miller in 2015.
“Brock Turner's blood alcohol content was double the legal limit during his sexual assault of Chanel Miller in 2015”
Rape as inherent wrong
Rape is wrong because it treats victims as objects rather than people whose preferences matter.
“Rape is wrong because it treats victims as objects rather than people whose preferences matter”
Snapchat messages evidence
Fraternity members sent messages about Jane Doe's availability including 'you can walk in and whip it out rn'.
“Fraternity members sent messages about Jane Doe's availability including 'you can walk in and whip it out rn'”
Perpetrator responsibility
Under solicitude, Snapchat messages prove accused men treated Jane Doe as an object rather than a person.
“Under solicitude, Snapchat messages prove accused men treated Jane Doe as an object rather than a person”
Consent vs solicitude
Current consent language focuses on victim decisions; solicitude focuses on perpetrator responsibility for verifying consent.
“Current consent language focuses on victim decisions; solicitude focuses on perpetrator responsibility for verifying consent”
The essence
The Cornell fraternity case shows how current consent frameworks ignore perpetrator responsibility and victim autonomy.
