AWARENESS OF CAMPUS SEXUAL VIOLENCE Raising awareness about sexual violence is crucial for eradicating it. When people do not understand the significance of a problem, they cannot work to address it. However, people must have accurate and complete information to effectively address campus sexual violence, which requires activists, scholars, and educators to operate from a power-conscious perspective. In this chapter, I provide a brief history of campus sexual violence awareness-raising on college campuses, followed by an analysis of a few current awareness-raising events and strategies. Finally, I conclude the chapter with a discussion of ideas for more effectively engaging in awareness-raising about sexual violence on college and university campuses. HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVES Although people, and even more specifically women of color, have been organizing around issues of sexual violence for centuries (Giddings, 1984; Greensite, 2009; McGuire, 2010), many scholars identify the 1970s and 1980s as a significant turning point for addressing sexual violence on college campuses (Bevacqua, 2000; Bohmer & Parrot, 1993; Corrigan, 2013).

During this time, activists worked to raise awareness about the problem of sexual violence, striving to interrupt myths about sexual violence and help people understand the nature of sexual violence. In the 1970s, feminists initiated and engaged in a variety of consciousness-raising groups, working to support women in coming to understand the ways they experience sexism. In addition to addressing sexism and sexual harassment in the workplace, reproductive justice issues, and political and cultural power of women, feminists also continued to raise awareness about interpersonal violence, including sexual violence (Bevacqua, 2000). Activists in the 1970s through the 1990s also engaged in a variety of activist campaigns designed to raise awareness about sexual assault, including marches, protests, and demonstrations, some of which still exist in some form today. For example, Take Back the Night, The Clothesline Project, and Vagina Monologues are examples of longstanding awareness-raising events related to sexual violence. In 2006, Aishah Shahidah Simmons released the film NO! The Rape Documentary reminding viewers about the unique relationship between racism, sexism, and sexual violence for Black women. Each of these events contributes to the on-going discussion related to sexual violence on college and university campuses today.

Part of the awareness-raising related to sexual violence in the 1970s and 1980s was identifying the insidiousness of acquaintance sexual violence, which at the time, was referred to as “date rape” (Koss, 1985; Warshaw, 1988). Feminists in the larger community had already identified sexual violence as a part of the cycle of abuse in domestic violence. A breakthrough study in 1987 illuminated the problem of sexual violence in acquaintance or dating situations among college students. Koss and colleagues surveyed more than 6,000 students on 32 campuses, highlighting the reality that one in four college women experienced a completed or attempted sexual assault during her college career (Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987). This work paved the way for activists and educators to raise awareness about sexual violence as a significant problem beyond that of stranger rape. In consultation with the Ms. Foundation for Education, Robin Warshaw (1988) advanced Koss’ work through the groundbreaking book I Never Called It Rape, which illuminated and gave language to the experiences of thousands of college women as it related to sexual violence. Although many feminists and activists already knew that they had been experiencing rape and sexual violence in dating relationships, Koss and Warshaw helped to validate their experiences, giving language to their experiences and legitimizing it through research. Unfortunately, this early research failed to account for identities and experiences with oppression beyond that of gender and sexism, leading to limited information about the ways that racism, classism, ableism, and homophobia also influence people’s experiences with sexual violence. STRATEGIES AND EVENTS Today, activists and educators build on this history to raise awareness about sexual violence on college campuses. Activists employ a variety of strategies and organize many events to raise people’s awareness about sexual violence. In this chapter, I organize these approaches into three major categories: (1) prevalence of sexual assault; (2) definitions and dynamics of sexual violence; and (3) resources for survivors in the aftermath of sexual assault, including reporting procedures. Activists and educators may use organized messaging strategies, including press releases, brochures, and posters; intentional anonymous infiltration of mainstream spaces, including posters and art; grassroots information-sharing, including social media and informal discussions; among a variety of other strategies to raise awareness about sexual violence.

The purpose of raising awareness related to sexual violence is to make more people aware of the problem to garner more support for policy change, support for survivors, and accountability for perpetrators, ultimately eradicating sexual violence. Prevalence As described above, one of the significant aspects of the history of sexual violence awareness-raising includes making people aware of the prevalence and types of sexual violence happening on college campuses. Today, the message that one in four women will experience sexual violence in her college career is prevalent and students report a high level of awareness about the significance of sexual violence (Walsh, Banyard, Moynihan, Ward, & Cohn, 2010). Activists and educators share this message through educational programs, including orientation and mandatory online training for new college students. Further, reporters frequently focus on this statistic when reporting about sexual violence in written and television media (Baumgartner & McAdon, 2017; McCummings, Lingerfelt, & Salon Young Americans, 2018). In fact, one organization to address sexual violence by engaging men as active bystanders is even called “One in Four” (One in Four, n.d.).

Despite the increased awareness of the prevalence of sexual violence on college campuses, some challenges exist. Examining the effectiveness of awareness about the prevalence of sexual violence through a power-conscious lens illuminates some of these challenges. One of the challenges is that few college students understand what this number means. Despite knowing that sexual violence happens at alarmingly high rates on college campuses, many students still subscribe to stranger-danger myths, meaning that they believe that most sexual assaults are committed by strangers, rather than people known to the victims (Fisher & Sloan, 2003; Hayes-Smith & Levett, 2010; Linder & Lacy, 2017). Further, many college students also subscribe to the myth that perpetrators of sexual violence primarily target pretty, white cisgender heterosexual women as victims (Hockett, Saucier, & Badke, 2016). Finally, the one-in-four statistic also contributes to an over-focus on victims, resulting in the invisibility of perpetrators. Stranger-danger Myths Although students may be aware of the high rates of sexual violence on college campuses, their strategies for protecting themselves still revolve around stranger-danger myths.

In a study recently conducted at a southeastern university in the US, cisgender women students identified carrying pepper spray and other weapons, not walking alone at night, and watching their drinks at parties and bars as their primary strategies for reducing their risk of sexual violence (Linder & Lacy, 2017). Further, most campus safety websites offer tips for preventing sexual assault and many of these tips focus on victims’ responsibility to prevent sexual assault and focus on stranger danger. These safety tips primarily focus on women as potential victims and men as potential perpetrators (Bedera & Nordmeyer, 2015; Lund & Thomas, 2015). Although it is important for people to be cognizant of their safety in a variety of settings, it is also important for people to recognize that they are more likely to be targeted by someone they know than by someone they do not know. In fact, 86% of sexual assaults happen when a perpetrator targets someone they know (Black et al., 2011).

Further, most sexual violence happens between people of similar socioeconomic classes and happens intra-racially (between people of the same race; Black et al., 2011). With the exception of Native American women, most people are assaulted by people of the same race. Given the history of colonization and current context of ineffective legal strategies for addressing violence perpetrated by non-Native people on Native American reservations, Native American women are often targeted by white perpetrators (Deer, 2015, 2017). Despite this history, most white women are socialized to fear the “other,” specifically Black and Latino men who are strangers to them. Media representations of perpetrators of sexual violence contribute to this narrative about perpetrators of sexual violence, resulting in people misperceiving who perpetrators of sexual violence are (Meyers, 2004; Patton & Snyder-Yuly, 2007). The misunderstanding of the dynamics of sexual violence may contribute to an increased risk of sexual violence because students fail to understand the appropriate times to intervene and “protect” themselves from the wrong people. Although it is never a potential victim’s responsibility to protect themselves from sexual assault, people – especially women and gender nonbinary people – do engage in a fair number of strategies to reduce their risk of being targeted for sexual assault.

However, because people misperceive and misunderstand the dynamics of sexual violence, they are usually not protecting themselves from the people most likely to cause harm – people they know, trust, and are in relationship with. Teaching students to understand the nuanced dynamics of sexual violence may contribute to a reduced risk of violence. When students understand that people they know are more likely to target them as potential victims of sexual assault, they may be more astute to some warning signs perpetrators display. Pretty White Women Myths Because research frequently fails to disaggregate data based on identities other than a binary gender, the one-in-four statistic about campus sexual assault primarily applies to heterosexual, white, cisgender women. Most research on campus sexual violence includes an overrepresentation of white women and rarely collects demographic information on sexual orientation, ability, or gender identity (Linder, Williams, Lacy, Parker, & Grimes, 2017). Specifically, in a content analysis of 10 years of research about campus sexual violence, 20% of articles included demographic information on sexual orientation, 0.9% on ability status, and 1.4% on gender identity (allowing people to identify as something other than man or woman; Linder et al., 2017). Although the research may include transgender women, women with disabilities, or queer women, the researchers do not know because they did not ask, making the experiences of people at these intersections invisible.

Further, although 72% of researchers collect demographic information related to race, fewer than 22% of articles included an analysis based on race. Researchers use racial demographic information to describe their samples, but not to analyze their findings (Linder et al., 2017). The few studies that have disaggregated data based on identities, including race, ability, sexual orientation, and gender identity, illuminate that perpetrators often target people with minoritized identities at higher rates than their nonminoritized peers. Studies are difficult to interpret because researchers define and measure sexual violence and identity categories differently. The most frequently cited studies in the US that disaggregate data based on identities beyond gender include the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NIPSVS) conducted by the Centers for Disease Control (Black et al., 2011) and the Association of American Universities’ (AAU) Campus Climate Survey on Sexual Assault and Sexual Misconduct (Cantor et al., 2015). The NIPSVS study includes a national sample not specific to college students, but indicates that women of color (with the exception of Asian women) experience significantly higher rates of rape than white women (Black et al., 2011).

The AAU study, specific to college students, reports mixed results related to race and sexual violence, but indicates that queer and trans students and students with disabilities experience exceptionally high rates of sexual violence (Cantor et al., 2015). People at the intersections of more than one of these identities experience even higher rates of sexual violence (Porter & McQuiller Williams, 2011). Perpetrators likely target minoritized populations at higher rates because they believe they can get away with it and because entitlement and power are the root of sexual violence. The mere existence of minoritized people makes some heterosexual, cisgender, white men uncomfortable (either consciously or unconsciously) because minoritized people interrupt the status quo. Interrupting current power structures results in people from dominant groups believing that they are being disempowered, resulting in them acting out and causing harm to minoritized people to maintain their power over people who do not share their identities and experiences, as illustrated throughout history in the US and other Western, colonized countries.

The implications of focusing on only one type of victim in campus sexual violence education are significant. When people are taught to picture a pretty, white, cisgender, straight woman as the primary victim of sexual violence, they likely fail to consider other people as potential victims. Failing to consider that other people may also be victims of sexual violence means that well-meaning students, educators, and administrators likely unintentionally minimize some students’ experiences with sexual violence, resulting in them not receiving the care they need. For example, when a gay male student discloses to an academic advisor that he wants to drop a class because he is struggling with what he describes as a “personal issue” with someone in the class, it is unlikely the academic advisor would think of sexual violence as the potential “personal issue” unless the advisor had power-conscious training (or personal experience) related to sexual violence. Given that victims are portrayed as white, cisgender heterosexual women, the academic advisor may consider sexual violence as a potential issue if a white, cisgender, heterosexual woman presents this problem to them, but not in the case of a gay male student.

The academic advisor may not think to offer resources related to interpersonal violence to the male student and he may miss out on potential resources that could serve him. Additionally, if the resources available to survivors of sexual violence consistently portray women in their materials or are only available through a “women’s center,” this student may not think that the services are for him, which I will explore in Chapter 3. Invisibility of Perpetrators Closely related to the challenge of the myth of stranger danger is the challenge of failing to name perpetrators as responsible. The one-in-four statistic fails to name and address perpetrators of sexual violence, which subliminally contributes to placing disproportionate responsibility on victims to prevent sexual violence. Although remaining victim-centered is an important component of sexual violence response, it may be less than effective for raising awareness about preventing sexual violence. Focusing heavily on victims in media coverage and research may result in perpetrators, especially white, middle-class perpetrators, remaining invisible. Many of the ways activists, scholars, and journalists frequently report statistics sound as if the sexual assault just happens, and no one is responsible for committing it.

What if, instead of focusing exclusively on victims of sexual violence, the statistics focused on the number of perpetrators of sexual violence? Framing discussions about sexual violence by naming the number of perpetrators and how many people they target may result in an increased focus on addressing perpetrators of sexual violence. For example, by stating, “Research indicates that 11.4% of college men have committed acts of sexual violence” (Gidycz, Warkentin, Orchowski, & Edwards, 2011), people may have a different understanding of who perpetrators are and an increased attention to addressing perpetrators of sexual violence as a form of prevention. What if scholars, activists, and journalists spent as much time and energy on statistics about perpetrators as they do on the statistic about one in four women experiencing sexual violence? What if college students could specifically name that one in 10 men has committed an act of sexual violence? How would this shift the responsibility and focus of sexual violence prevention? Similar to the research about victimization, most of the participants in studies about perpetration include white, middle-class, heterosexual, and assumingly cisgender men (Linder et al., 2017).

Although the participants of these studies include primarily white, heterosexual, and cisgender men, researchers frequently fail to name the racial or other identities of their participants. If a study had over 80% Black or African American participants, researchers would most certainly describe the racial identity of their participants, and likely attribute many of their findings to race; however, because whiteness is invisible and considered the norm in mainstream Western society, researchers fail to name the relationship between whiteness and perpetration that likely exists. Working from the tenet of the power-conscious framework to name and interrupt dominant group members’ investment in and benefit from systems of oppression, scholars and activists must do more to name perpetrators’ responsibility for sexual violence. Definitions and Dynamics Other approaches to raising awareness about campus sexual violence include targeting people’s emotional senses to raise awareness about the definitions of sexual assault and the dynamics of how sexual violence happens. Activists frequently work to raise awareness about prevalence, definitions, and dynamics through events like Take Back the Night, Carry that Weight, or online campaigns where people share their stories and experiences with sexual violence.

In this section, I will examine a few specific awareness-raising events that take place on college and university campuses through a power-conscious lens. I choose to focus on a few examples of events to illustrate the complexity of developing power-conscious awareness events, rather than to critique or praise any particular event. Although I focus on specific events in this chapter, the principles, questions, and issues raised apply to many events and activities. Finally, I will conclude this section with an examination of social media as a specific strategy activists use to raise awareness about sexual violence through a power-conscious lens, illustrating the challenges and benefits of social media as a tool for activism and awareness. Walk a Mile in Her Shoes Community and campus organizers frequently organize an event called Walk a Mile in Her Shoes (WAMHS). Activists designed this event to engage men in better understanding the experiences of women by asking them to walk a mile in high heels. The event took off on college campuses in the early 2000s, with many campuses hosting WAMHS marches and rallies. However, thanks to the critical thinking of many scholars and activists (Bridges, 2010; Kannis & Iverson, 2017; Nicolazzo, 2015), many campuses have stopped hosting these events. WAMHS events are particularly harmful on many levels, including making light of a very important subject. The atmosphere at most WAMHS events is light-hearted and includes lots of laughter about men trying to walk in high heels. Although many organizers attempt to engage in education at these marches, people who attend the marches report a lot of giggling and goofing among the participants, even during times when participants should be listening to organizers share information about the prevalence and dynamics of sexual violence (Bridges, 2010; Kannis & Iverson, 2017).

In addition to this being sexist because it assumes that being a woman means wearing high heels, or being otherwise feminine, it also perpetuates cissexism, which is the belief that all people must exist on a gender binary and meet the expectations put upon them by society in that binary. Comments overheard at WAMHS events are often homophobic and transphobic in nature (Bridges, 2010; Nicolazzo, 2015). The reality is that homophobia and transphobia are significant contributors to sexual violence, so the fact that an event exists to raise awareness about sexual violence by perpetuating rape culture is astounding. Although some people may argue there are ways to do an “appropriate” WAMHS, I am doubtful. This is one of those events that we should likely just do away with! Take Back the Night Take Back the Night (TBTN) is another crucial awareness-raising event that has made a significant impact on people’s awareness of sexual violence. Additionally, TBTN marches often have a secondary impact of creating spaces of healing for survivors. Generally, TBTN marches consist of a speak-out that includes opportunities for people to share their stories related to sexual violence and potentially a main speaker who addresses sexual violence through a keynote address, spoken word poetry, or music.

Before or after the speak-out, participants in TBTN events march through their campus or community at dusk, yelling chants and carrying signs about rape and sexual violence. TBTN marchers sometimes experience harassment from onlookers, illustrating the significance and importance of the events. Ironically, TBTN marches also frequently include “protection” from police officers on the march routes. TBTN marches are an example of events that have evolved over time to be more mindful of power and identity. For example, many TBTN marches started as women’s only spaces – spaces for survivors to come together, share their stories, and engage in healing. They were designed as women-only events as a way to ensure that perpetrators would not be present at the event. As one can see, the gender-exclusive nature of the events is rooted in the faulty assumptions that only women are survivors and only men are perpetrators and that people only identify as either men or women

. Over time, many TBTN marches have changed to be gender-expansive, meaning that people of all genders are welcome to participate as long as the focus stays on creating a space for survivors to share their stories as part of their healing processes. For activists and educators who continue to engage in TBTN marches and planning, considering questions related to power and privilege remain crucial. For example, given what we know about the relationship between racism and the criminal justice system, how does police presence impact people of color who attend or may want to attend the event? Similarly, are all of the speakers at the event cisgender heterosexual nondisabled white women? What are the ways that other people’s stories may be centered in this event? Given the exceptionally high rates of sexual violence among people from minoritized communities, how are their experiences represented? Finally, although TBTN events are frequently held as “marches,” is the route accessible for people who use wheelchairs? Is there an intentional focus on reaching people with physical disabilities and providing means of participation beyond marching?

Are sign language interpreters available and present? The Role of Social Media One of the strategies many activists use when engaging in campaigns designed to reach people through their emotions is by infiltrating mainstream spaces that may not typically focus on sexual violence. For example, the #MeToo campaign that recently took place on Facebook and Twitter after several allegations of sexual harassment by high-profile men in Hollywood caught on quickly and showed up in newsfeeds across the globe. This campaign worked because people could not avoid it. If a person regularly uses Facebook, it would have been hard for them to not to see at least a few posts with the #MeToo hashtag. Eventually, people would have to stop and take notice that at least something was going on related to sexual harassment. Similarly, Emma Sulkawicz’s art project at Columbia University worked because she drew attention to the problem of campus sexual violence by carrying a mattress around campus for an entire academic year. She carried the mattress in protest of her institution failing to hold the person who harmed her accountable for his actions.

The campaign caught people’s attention because it was hard not to notice the woman in class with a mattress beside her. Eventually the Carry that Weight campaign caught on and activists on campuses all over organized mattress displays and shared their stories using the hashtag #CarryThatWeight on social media. Some people may critique social media as a form of activism, calling it “slacktivism” meaning that it does not create any real change because it is “just online” (Cabrera, Matias, & Montoya, 2017). This argument fails to consider the dynamics of power and privilege in a variety of ways. First, online spaces are “real life.” They have significant implications for our day-to-day well-being and influence the ways that we interact with each other. Additionally, online spaces may be some people’s only option for engaging in awareness-raising as a form of activism. Given the ramifications of participating in “in the streets” activism, some students do not have the luxury of participating. For example, being arrested for civil disobedience has a significantly different impact on students of color, transgender students, and poor students than it does on their white, cisgender, middle-class peers.

Given the realities of racism in criminal justice systems and in hiring practices, people of color may experience more significant consequences in the criminal justice system and will surely experience more significant consequences for having a record (Ross, 2014). Given that white people with a criminal record are more likely to be hired at most jobs than people of color without a criminal record (Ross, 2014), imagine what it might be like for a person of color with a criminal record trying to find a job. Similarly, unemployment rates among transgender people are exceedingly high (Center for American Progress, 2015; Ross, 2014), pointing to similar problems related to employment and criminal records for transgender people. Further, given that jail cells are segregated by gender, they are very dangerous places for transgender people. Finally, although middle-class people may be able to afford legal costs for engaging in civil disobedience, this additional expense could impact poor and working-class students’ ability to afford rent, food, and other basic necessities. Even for activists who engage in less potentially dangerous activities than civil disobedience, the consequences for their actions can be time-consuming and significant. Participating in organized protests, marches, and sit-ins requires time that students who have to work to support themselves do not always have.

Further, activist spaces often center or focus on one issue at a time, rendering the experiences of people with multiple minoritized identities invisible, resulting in them not feeling comfortable to participate. For example, organizing around issues of sexual orientation frequently focuses on the experiences of white and cisgender people, making it unlikely that transgender and queer people of color will be heard in these spaces. Social media provides an outlet for people who frequently do not see themselves in local movements to find community and opportunity to engage with other people whose experiences more closely align with their own. Awareness of Resources Another important strand of awareness-raising strategies on college campuses includes letting people know about resources for survivors in the aftermath of sexual violence, including campus adjudication processes. Research about campus reporting systems indicates that many survivors of sexual violence choose not to report their experiences of sexual violence to campus officials (Orchowski, Meyer, & Gidycz, 2009; Zinzow & Thompson, 2011). If survivors do choose to discuss their experiences with assault, they do so with family members and friends (Orchowski et al., 2009).

Survivors share a number of reasons for not reporting their experiences with sexual violence, including that they do not think they will be believed, they do not think their experience is “bad” enough to be considered sexual assault, and that they do not know how or where to report (Orchowski et al., 2009; Zinzow & Thompson, 2011). As one may suspect, people with minoritized identities, who are frequently harmed by systems of authority and power, report at even lower rates than their dominant group peers. For example, women of color, gay and trans* people, and people with disabilities report sexual assault at alarmingly low rates (Findley, Plummer, & McMahon, 2016; Ollen, Ameral, Reed, & Hines, 2017; Thompson, Sitterle, Clay, & Kingree, 2007). Campus adjudication processes can be particularly confusing, especially in times when laws and policies are constantly in flux about ways campuses must respond to and address campus sexual assault. Although some campus administrators have maintained consistent reporting procedures throughout legislative attempts to address sexual violence on campus, others have changed their reporting processes and who hears cases of sexual violence multiple times in the past few years.

I will discuss the specifics of reporting and adjudication processes in Chapter 3; the purpose of this chapter is to examine campus educators’ strategies for letting students know about the processes. Educators and administrators typically use orientation programs and email communication as a strategy for letting people know about campus adjudication processes. Typically, students must sign a form or click a box indicating that they have read the student code of conduct before they can register for classes. Clicking the box allows the institution to say that students have read, and should therefore know, the processes for handling any kinds of conduct issues, including sexual violence. Similarly, students may find the process for reporting sexual violence available on many university websites, yet the processes are confusing and sometimes difficult to find (Franklin, Jin, Ashworth, & Viada, 2016). Depending on the institutional type, colleges and universities may have their own police departments and a sexual assault response office (Title IX offices in the US), leading to additional confusion.

Media coverage and legislative involvement in determining whether or not colleges and universities should be responding to crimes, rather than violations of the student code of conduct, have made the process of reporting even more confusing for students. Unfortunately, even when universities do provide education and awareness about these processes, many students ignore or minimize them because they do not think they will need this information. Then, when a student is in crisis, they do not know where to turn. Applying a power-conscious lens to this practice leads to questions about the accessibility of the information available for students and to whom the materials are directed. For example, this is one of the few places in sexual violence work where some attention is paid to perpetrators, yet this attention generally seeks to protect their rights, to provide a “fair and impartial” adjudication process for them. One additional attempt to raise awareness about sexual assault is educating people on how to respond if a friend discloses to them their experience. Research indicates that the first response a survivor receives after disclosing an experience with sexual violence significantly influences their recovery from the trauma (Borja, Callahan, & Long, 2006; Sabina & Ho, 2014).

Given that most people disclose to friends or family members before they disclose to a counselor, administrator, or police officer (Sabina & Ho, 2014), it is important for the general public to be well-educated on appropriate responses to sexual violence. Teaching people to respond to survivors by empowering them, letting them decide how to move forward, and believing that something happened is very important. Educators and activists may do this through passive programs, such as posters and social media campaigns or through educational face-to-face programs. In addition to teaching the basics of effectively responding to survivors of sexual violence, it is also important to examine the nuances of the role of power in these responses. CONCLUSION Although women of color have organized for centuries around addressing sexual violence at the intersection of racism and sexism (McGuire, 2010), many campus activists primarily focus on sexism as the root of sexual violence. Some activists strive to address racism, homophobia, transphobia, and other forms of oppression in their organizing, but when relying on limited historical perspectives and power-neutral research, nuance related to other forms of oppression often gets lost.

Raising awareness about campus sexual violence through a power-conscious lens remains important in a climate where more and more people are invested in addressing campus sexual assault. Failing to account for the ways in which identities and power influence people’s understanding of sexual violence results in less-than-effective strategies for preventing and eventually eradicating sexual violence. In Chapter 3, I will examine responses to campus sexual violence, highlighting current campus practices and advocating for more power-conscious approaches to effectively respond to sexual violence on college and university campuses. MLA (Modern Language Assoc.) Linder, Chris. Sexual Violence on Campus : Power-Conscious Approaches to Awareness, Prevention, and Response. Vol. First edition, Emerald Publishing Limited, 2018. APA (American Psychological Assoc.) Linder, C. (2018). Sexual Violence on Campus : Power-Conscious Approaches to Awareness, Prevention, and Response: Vol. First edition. Emerald Publishing Limited