Eleven rapes, 10 fondlings, 16 counts of dating violence, 11 counts of stalking and four counts of domestic violence: the 2023 statistics reported in Stony Brook University’s 2024 Annual Security and Fire Safety Report paint a picture, but it’s a dangerously incomplete picture of the true scope of sexual violence on campus. These numbers fail to mention the numbers of stories untold. Sexual violence is widely underreported, particularly on college campuses.
According to the National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC), “one in five women and one in 16 men are sexually assaulted while in college” and “more than 90 percent of sexual assaults go unreported.” Many survivors may never report their experiences due to fear, shame or the belief that their claims won’t be taken seriously. This means that these reported issues could only be a fraction of the incidents that have actually occurred on campus. The NSVRC further highlights that the vast majority of survivors know their attacker, and that many incidents occur within social settings such as parties or dorms, environments where students often feel the most vulnerable and the most pressured to stay silent.
When compared to universities with similar student body sizes, the data becomes even more striking. In 2023, Stony Brook reported 11 rapes and 10 fondlings. In comparison, George Mason University and the University at Buffalo reported five rapes and three fondlings and seven rapes and four fondlings, respectively. While differences in reporting structures may exist, such discrepancies call attention to either a greater prevalence of sexual violence at Stony Brook or a significant disparity in how cases are handled and disclosed. Either scenario underscores the urgent need for the University to take a closer look at its policies, campus climate and reporting systems. Stony Brook’s data could very well be skewed due to various factors, including cultural and institutional barriers, a lack of trust in the reporting system, fear of retaliation or a lack of knowledge about consent and support services. Institutionally, students may face confusing reporting procedures, long wait times for investigations or inconsistent follow-ups, all of which discourage survivors from coming forward. This underreporting is not unique to Stony Brook but is a systemic issue across many campuses nationwide.
The Root Causes of Sexual Violence on College Campuses
To properly investigate and address sexual violence on campus, it is crucial to understand the root causes. Numerous factors contribute to the prevalence of sexual violence in universities and college education.
The first major factor in the causes of sexual violence is alcohol and drug consumption. The use of alcohol is often attributed to the normalities of college life; however, its role in enabling sexual violence is typically underestimated. Research consistently shows that alcohol consumption is a contributing factor in the majority of sexual assaults on campuses. About 50-70% of campus sexual assaults involve alcohol consumption by one or both parties involved. Alcohol lowers inhibitions and impairs judgment, making it easier for perpetrators to take advantage of their victims. For many college students, drinking is a social norm, often tied to parties, fraternities and other social events. In this environment, the lines between consent and coercion can blur, especially in situations where one or both parties are intoxicated. For the perpetrator, alcohol can disinhibit aggressive behaviors, making individuals more likely to commit acts of sexual violence without considering the implications of their actions. Conversely, for the victim, alcohol intoxication can make it more difficult for individuals to defend themselves, recognize when they are in a vulnerable situation or even report the assault accurately if it occurs.
As for alcohol and drug consumption on campus, the 2024 Annual Security Report details 145 incidents of liquor law referrals, all of which occurred in residential facilities. The report also notes an increase in drug law referrals from 18 incidents in 2022 to 46 incidents in 2023.
While this number is shocking, it is not nearly as close to the actual numbers of drug and alcohol use likely used on campus. However, these numbers reflect the culture around drugs and alcohol on campus. To be blunt, many college students drink and smoke, and these activities fly under the radar of drug and alcohol rules consistently. Yet, the University does not seem to take its own policies seriously.
For example, since Jan. 1, 2016, Stony Brook has contended to be a tobacco-free campus and this policy has since been updated on July 17, 2017 claiming that “the use of the following items are prohibited: Cigarettes, Electronic cigarettes, Cigars/cigarillos, Hookah-smoke products and Oral and smokeless tobacco products.” Ironically, while Stony Brook claims to prioritize its “tobacco-free” campus, you can find students in the corner of Frank Melville Jr. Memorial Library smoking freely with little University Police Department interference.
Even the measures and procedures taken to address poor conduct regarding drugs and alcohol use seem to be just a slap on the wrist. A Reddit thread last semester was titled, “Incident report for being drunk on campus,” asked, “What’s the chances I get kicked out if it’s the first time?”
Many students replied with their experiences, with one saying, “You’ll probably be fine. Last year I got ‘caught’ having edibles and all I had to do [was] some online thing and a meeting with someone.”
Another student had a similar response, replying, “You’ll be fine[, it] happened to me a week ago lol. Just have to go to a meeting and take a class. No record either.”
The student who started the original threat later confirmed these statements, writing: “EDIT: I had to have a meeting with one woman to talk about what happened. Then[,] I had a check-up with another woman to talk about not drinking/safe drinking. None of my scholarships were revoked.”
This reveals something more than just a culture of casual substance abuse, it points to an alarming normalization of risky behaviors on campus — behaviors that create a fertile ground for sexual violence to thrive. When students do not take campus policies seriously, and when the University fails to enforce these policies meaningfully, it sends a dangerous message: rules are flexible, consequences are minimal and accountability is optional. This isn’t a call for punitive crackdowns, but rather for a system that emphasizes early intervention, restorative practices and education that helps students understand the real-world consequences of their actions. This relaxed environment doesn’t just allow drug and alcohol misuse to go unchecked — it also undermines prevention efforts against sexual violence. While alcohol and drug culture play a significant role in sexual violence, they’re only one piece of a much deeper issue that’s embedded in campus culture, policy and education.
This is where Title IX becomes crucial. It is a federal law and vital tool for ensuring gender equality while simultaneously protecting students from sexual violence on college campuses. While Title IX mandates that universities take immediate and appropriate action in response to sexual harassment and assault, many campuses fall short in ensuring its full implementation. For example, in October 2023, a federal jury found Baylor University negligent in handling a Title IX lawsuit filed by former student Dolores Lozano. Lozano reported being physically abused by a football player in 2014. The jury determined that Baylor failed to take sufficient measures to prevent the assaults and maintained a policy of deliberate indifference to reports of sexual harassment, both of which put Lozano at risk. Similarly, at Columbia University in 2017, a former student alleged that even after reporting multiple instances of rape and harassment, University officials were largely apathetic and unresponsive. The lawsuit claimed that “Columbia failed to take the attacks seriously and did not respond to them promptly as required by federal law.”
To truly use Title IX as a proactive measure, institutions must strengthen their commitment to preventative education, transparent reporting mechanisms and timely investigations. Studies by the National Women’s Law Center have shown that universities that proactively comply with Title IX standards and go beyond minimum requirements see an increase in the reporting of sexual violence and improvements in supporting survivors. By providing clear guidelines on what constitutes sexual violence and sexual harassment and offering immediate resources for those affected, campuses can ensure that students feel supported and empowered to come forward without fear of retaliation.
Additionally, universities must be transparent in the handling of cases, including providing students with clear timelines for investigations and disciplinary actions, which aligns with Title IX’s requirement for non-discriminatory practices. Accountability through Title IX should not just be about responding to incidents of violence but actively preventing them through a culture of respect, fairness and clear policies. The strength of Title IX lies in its ability to address both the immediate and long-term needs of survivors while fostering a campus-wide commitment to safety and equity.
One of the primary reasons sexual violence persists on college campuses is due to a lack of understanding about consent. Research indicates that many students, especially first-year students, enter college with a limited understanding of what consent means. Many students fail to recognize that consent must be clear, voluntary and ongoing and that it cannot be given under coercion, pressure or intoxication. In many cases, college students may equate the absence of a direct “no” with consent, believing that if someone does not explicitly say “stop,” then the encounter is not an assault. This misconception plays a significant role in the prevalence of sexual violence on campuses.
Moreover, the lack of mandatory, comprehensive education about sexual violence, especially about healthy relationships, boundary-setting and clear communication, leaves students vulnerable to perpetuating harmful behaviors. At Stony Brook, as with many universities, there is likely a gap in effective consent education. As for sexual violence education, the University offers the Green Dot Program, an optional training program that teaches strategies for preventing forms of power-based personal violence, such as rape and sexual assault, relationship violence, harassment and stalking. However, only 5,000 students are Green Dot trained out of 26,000+ students on campus. That is only 20% of the student population. These awareness programs are a decent start in addressing the complex nature of sexual violence, however, education should go beyond theoretical knowledge and reactive measures.
Several universities across the country have implemented innovative policies that could serve as models for Stony Brook. The University of Southern California mandates a 120-minute workshop focused on consent for first-year and transfer students, and requires second-year students to participate in a related workshop on healthy relationships. Mandatory consent education can offer students the tools and knowledge they need to navigate relationships in a healthy, respectful way, ensuring that the lines between consent, coercion and assault are not blurred. This education should not be limited to one-time seminars or optional workshops. It should be integrated into core experiences at the University. These are concepts that could be taught and discussed in SBU 101 (Introduction to Stony Brook) rather than regurgitating information we learn anyways from freshman orientation. This shift in understanding could go a long way in fostering a culture where sexual violence is actively prevented, rather than merely addressed after the fact. Education alone is not enough. It must be coupled with institutional commitment from the administration, faculty and staff to create a campus environment that prioritizes survivors and holds perpetrators accountable. Stony Brook must continue to develop support systems that empower survivors, making it clear that coming forward will not result in retaliation, shame or disbelief.
Finally, it is imperative that the University listens to its students and involves them in shaping policies and programs. Students have valuable insights into what works and what doesn’t, and they should have a seat at the table when it comes to developing and implementing these crucial changes.
In another Reddit thread titled “Please please do not walk alone,” a user emphasized their fears of walking alone after being raped on campus. Another user commented, writing, “School needs to address the problem with many poor[ly] lit areas on campus. Does anyone know which department we should reach out to regarding this? Safety should be the school’s [No.] 1 priority.” Another user suggested the Residential Safety Program Walk Service for those scared to walk alone. The original poster stated, “I was told that’s only if someone is being followed.” Many students sympathized, sharing similar experiences of being raped, kissed or groped forcefully on campus and emphasized walking in pairs and groups on campus. These threads reflect a broader truth: students are not just asking for change, they’re begging for it. When students are left to seek answers in online forums and fend for their safety in the shadows of campus, it reveals a deep failure in the University’s responsibility. This fear should not be normalized — it should be a wake-up call.
Safety isn’t just about responding to violence after it happens — it’s about preventing it in the first place. Stony Brook University needs to prioritize proactive measures rather than reactive ones. It’s not enough to offer resources after abuse occurs; the University must invest in mandatory, comprehensive and preventative education that addresses consent, healthy relationships and bystander intervention.
Education is one of the most powerful tools in stopping violence before it happens. With education, we can begin to dismantle the culture of silence and stigma that often surrounds the topic of sexual assault. If Stony Brook truly wants to foster a safe and inclusive environment, it must take a hard look at the gaps in its approach and commit to meaningful, student-informed reform. A campus that only acts after harm is done is failing its students.
It’s time for the University to lead with intention, education and accountability before another story becomes a statistic.
