Comments on: An interview with usf’s president on diversity, sex, sin, and what it means to be a Jesuit

By: Erik

Erik — Sun, 12 Apr 2015 02:44:51 +0000

Many who worked with Messrs. Paul Fitzgerald at two other campuses he was embedded in before arriving at USF found him to be among the most destructive of administrators we had encountered – especially during his days in the Deans Office of Arts and Sciences at Santa Clara University. He had his eye on the Provost position there.
When then President Paul Locatelli looked beyond Fitzgerald and appointed Denise Carmody Provost, Paul went wild. Angry, antagonistic, self pitying, destructive: these were words that
characterized his demeanor and actions at that time. Paul Fitzgerald is cemented to the far right wing of the church ( nothing else explains his rise to power) and it is unfortunate USF will have to suffer through his reign. In addition to his views repulsive attitude toward women that begin to be conveyed by his comments in Foghorn’s interview, at Santa Clara he spoke in a way that made him seem entirely against multicultural education, ethnic studies, and diversity. On the other hand, take a look at USF. Steve Privett did what he could to promote tolerance and open mindedness in the church. Messrs. Fitzgerald has been brought aboard to do the opposite. How the Trustees of USF could be so blind as to appoint him is difficult to understand. Unless, of course, the same forces that created Ave Maria University were involved. Some of them actually wear white collars and teach at USF.

By: Mary Jane Licastro

Mary Jane Licastro — Thu, 02 Apr 2015 22:41:02 +0000

I thought if I’m feeling so free to be critical the least I could do is offer some advice that makes sense. Your Think About It course that freshman are required to take freshman year, from what I understand, is an impressive course. Part of the point I was making is that there seems to be quite a bit of confusion, especially amongst males as to what constitutes rape and I fear they are getting the wrong message.
so my suggestion to you is that you have an entirely separate course including both males and females. One that gives a powerful and clear message about what rape is exactly; because,again it is not about college boys being too drunk to know better etc. Those excuses are letting college males off the hook for having committed a violent criminal act. As I said, there is NO excuse for rape.
I believe if you have that powerful course that gives the students knowledge that leaves them WITHOUT any doubt as to what rape is, then when and if it happens EVERYONE is on the same page about what it is that happened, there would be no question that a college male accused of rape for example, will not be playing their sport that evening or any evenings after until the issue has come to it’s conclusion.
And contrary to what some believe it is a rare female who will accuse someone of rape without having been raped (have your statistics guy look that up). However, if it is proven that a female has accused a male of rape when it hasn’t occurred, then she should be prosecuted to the extent the law will allow. So to use that as a reason to allow young men who have been accused to walk free, it really doesn’t hold water.
My strong belief is there is hesitation amongst colleges to speak loudly and with confidence about what constitutes rape because they fear having to take responsibility but that responsibility should never be left to one person. I believe part of the reason for that is that no one really wants to take a stand, leaving frightened, assaulted college females with nowhere to go and that is criminal.
So don’t be afraid to make that a part of your core curriculum because it’s such necessary information to have. The more black and white it is, because it is black and white, the quicker it can be handled in a way that uses the law to make the decisions necessary, (an educated police force).
Let me give you an example of how strongly I feel about this issue. When my daughter was looking for colleges, she received many letters, pamphlets etc. from an unnamed college in the midwest who had handle this same situation in an unforgivable way. When we had an envelope full of them, we sent them back to the school saying, “No thank you, we need our daughter to be at a school where she knows she’s safe and we knows she is safe.” We wanted them to never forget.

By: USFJane

USFJane — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 21:09:50 +0000

Fr. Fitz, you obviously based your answer to the sexual assault question on assumption and not on any kind of research. In a way, you happen to be correct. Based on studies from the Department of Justice Statistics, the rate of sexual assault among students as compared to non-students is higher, but not very statistically significant, based on the narrow populations surveyed. The rates are basically the same. It’s when you start to describe the “reasons why” that scares me, and probably a lot of other people. Uneducated assumptions like that coming from University Leadership have dangerous implications for women at USF. Your comments imply that if one is sexually assaulted (or maybe just not attending college), it is because they are stupid, unorganized, and do not have a “sense of themselves.”

By: Mary Jane Licastro

Mary Jane Licastro — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 02:01:15 +0000

Two things occurred to me. One is if college girls have been suffering while their rapists having been walking around campus free because the thinking is that he ‘just made a poor choice’, ‘he was drunk and didn’t know what he was doing’,’It was bad judgment on his part’ or anything similar, essentially letting them off the hook because of it; everyone involved should be drawn and quartered because there is absolutely NO EXCUSE for not fully educating yourselves about rape, what it is etc. then what all of these colleges have done is let rapists go free!.What, are we in the dark ages?
Also Reverend if your comment that females and males are equal was to in any way suggest that females and males share equal responsibility where campus rapes occur than I am confirming for you that getting yourself up to date on the definition of rape and everything that goes with it should be your top priority. With all due respect ‘shame on you’ if that was the case.

By: Mary Jane Licastro

Mary Jane Licastro — Wed, 01 Apr 2015 00:09:32 +0000

Reverend, as you can probably see, your interview didn’t go over well with women. The reason for that is that to integrate college rapes into your Think About It Act suggests that if students are taught how to respect each other and treat each other with dignity, it will help to solve the problem of the presence of college rapes.
What you need to know is that Rape is a violent act against a woman. It is meant to overpower her, humiliate her, and cause her great physical pain. It is not about teaching students to respect each other to prevent it. Rape has nothing to do with normal sexual relations and it certainly has nothing to do with some one making a bad judgment or a poor choice. Rape is committed by RAPISTS, it’s as simple as that.
A rapist doesn’t turn into one as a result of drugs or alcohol. There is NO excuse for rape.
there have been laws passed, The Rape Shield law for example.that protects a woman from having to march out her sexual history in court and its been quite a while since what a woman was wearing, what a woman was saying, or even if she was under the influence meant anything in terms of why a woman was raped. A rape victim is just that, a rape victim.
I’m heartened to hear that more females feel safer reporting their rape but why did it take so sickeningly long for that to happen. If it hadn’t been for the media and strong women support groups, there would still be fear for those college girls today.
So take any mention of rape out of your Think About it Act as there is nothing remotely related between the two. The Act without that is admirable however.