The fight against sexual harassment on campus began in 1977. The Warwick rape threats show little has changed

The group content was deeply shocking but sadly not surprising. Equally unsurprising was the utter inadequacy of the university’s response

Hundreds of students march on campus, protesting Warwick University’s response to the rape threats (Rebecca Brown)

For so many women, sexual harassment, assault and rape are a painfully familiar component of life at university. So when screenshots from a Warwick University student Facebook chat entitled “F*** Women, Disrespect them all” were shared online last year, the content was deeply shocking but sadly not surprising. Equally unsurprising was the utter inadequacy of the university’s response.

In the chat, a group of male students shared ableist, racist and homophobic comments and traded some of the most abhorrent rape threats imaginable. These threats were made about specific women at the university, women they knew and had befriended.

Initially, the university responded by excluding five of the students involved, with two receiving 10-year bans. For the women named in that chat – who have spoken of their heartbreak to discover men they considered friends and brothers had discussed them in such a way – the fact that those men would no longer be on campus must have been a great relief.

But then it was revealed that Warwick University had decided to reduce the 10-year bans to one year, allowing those men to return to campus while their victims are still studying.

Not only this, the university failed to contact some of the women involved to inform them directly. Instead, they discovered the news from a letter which began to circulate on social media, accompanied by the hashtag #ShameOnYouWarwick.

In response to the controversy, the university this week announced a further update: in what appeared to be a voluntary decision, the two men would not be returning after all. But without enforcing the ban itself, the university’s announcement reads more like an exercise in damage limitation than a recognition of its responsibilities.

A statement by the university’s vice-chancellor, Stuart Croft, does little to dispel this impression. Croft makes a point of repeating – four times – that the university has a “duty of care to all involved”, including the perpetrators. He also goes to great lengths to explain his personal shock, pain and revulsion on reading the group chat messages. At no point, however, does he directly address the shock, pain or revulsion that the victims must have felt. Nor does he address their continuing pain over the university’s treatment of their case.

The events at Warwick reflect a pattern which is visible at schools, colleges and universities across the UK. A survey last year found that nearly two-thirds of students and graduates had experienced sexual violence while studying at a UK university. Even more shockingly, only 2 per cent of those affected felt able to report the incident to their institution. These students spoke of a culture of “normalised” sexual violence.

In 1977, students led the Yale Undergraduate Women’s Caucus, conducting a survey about women’s experiences on campus. The results revealed discriminatory practices across the university and a failure to keep any record of reports of sexual harassment. Eventually the students sued Yale directly to push for the creation of a central registry of harassment reports – the first case in history to argue that sexual harassment is a form of discrimination.

As the lawsuit progressed the plaintiffs were subjected to new forms of harassment: they were sent death threats, used condoms and packages of excrement. Yet the women continued to fight until the case was lost at the federal Court of Appeals.

Despite the loss, the lawsuit was a landmark. Soon after, Yale set up the Sexual Harassments Grievance Board. That model was quickly rolled out to universities across the country and the responsibility of educational institutions to prevent sexual harassment was established. That was 40 years ago. How is it that so little has changed since then?

Warwick University runs a “We Get Consent” campaign. They hand out leaflets on sexual violence. They have a disciplinary procedure in place. And yet when a serious incident like this occurred, the women who were targeted found that the mechanisms for reporting incidents were inadequate and that they were not informed of decisions which might affect their mental wellbeing and even their physical safety. Even now, with protests and petitions rocking the campus, Warwick is failing to properly engage with their demands.

Leaflets and platitudes are not enough. Consent workshops should be compulsory in our educational institutions, reporting should be straightforward and sensitively handled, victims should receive proper support and disciplinary procedures should treat threats, harassment and assault seriously.

In my work in the nonprofit sector, where I campaigned for accountability on sexual harassment in the aid sector, and as a spokesperson for the Women’s Equality Party, I have learnt how deeply rooted structural misogyny and sexual violence really are. Tweaks to policy and procedure are not sufficient: we need an overhaul of the systems which foster these sexist and violent attitudes.

So many women have been subjected to sexual harassment, assault or rape during their education. So many women have been sexualised and humiliated by fellow students who suffered no consequences. So many women have been repeatedly let down by the institutions meant to protect them.

Warwick University has told those women that their right to justice, safety and an education free from discrimination is less important than caring for men who joke about raping their friends in the street. Shame on you Warwick.

Alexia Pepper de Caires is the Women’s Equality Party spokesperson to End Violence Against Women