Last September, Rice released the Survey of Unwanted Sexual Experiences results, which revealed that 1 in 4 undergraduate women and 1 in 14 undergraduate men were victims of sexual misconduct while at Rice. These results shocked many (“1 in 4?! How is that possible?”) and it seemed like we were finally on the brink of turning the tide on sexual violence.

It seemed as if Rice had woken up and realized that the "Rice Bubble" does not actually exist; living, breathing Rice students are affected by sexual violence in exactly the same ways as the rest of the nation. It seemed as if they had noticed campus sexual violence was not an isolated string of incidents, but rather a very distinct product of a culture that repeatedly accepts, allows, and even promotes rape culture.

In the wake of the campus-wide survey (September 2015), there was a call from the president and provost to substantially strengthen university efforts on sexual misconduct. A major new initiative was publicly announced, the Student Association’s “Critical Thinking in Sexuality” program, and even though there seemed to be limited support from students, faculty, and administrators alike, Rice seemed to be moving in the right direction.

Yet, just as we were all reaching for our metaphorical party poppers and confetti canons in celebration, the administration responded to a campus sexual assault, the incident on Sid seventh in January 2016, in a wildly inadequate and irresponsible manner. The administrative response was to blame the incident on such factors as alcohol, poor party planning, failure to register the party, and simply creating a "college party atmosphere," to the point where it actually became unclear that an assault had even occurred. They effectively shifted blame away from the assaulter and away from rape culture itself, opting to remedy a problem that isn’t quite the real problem, but looks and smells just like it. They were talking the talk, but failing so embarrassingly to walk the walk.

And now, eight months later, they have done it again. When the Rice MOB satirized Baylor University’s administrative incompetence in appropriately dealing with their football programs Title IX violations during the halftime performance of the home opener, the university was quick to offer what appeared to be an apology to any offended parties. It was half-hearted and vague, but nevertheless, to many people it looked and smelled like an apology. Rice’s statement expressed concern that the MOB’s performance “may have gone too far,” and that such a sensitive topic should not be discussed with lightheartedness in such a public setting.

Then, I ask, what exactly is the right time and place to discuss sexual assault? Is it at a party this weekend with your friends? Over tea with your grandmother? There is never going to be a "good" time and place to discuss sexual violence and there is never going to be a way to ensure that feathers won't be ruffled. But that doesn’t mean we should just not talk about it. We cannot afford to limit discussions of sexual assault on college campuses to a mild, palatable discourse, so as not to offend those in power. And as an institution that proclaims to hold high moral and ethical standards, Rice cannot — for fear of hypocrisy, at the very least — vow to address sexual assault on our campus, while ignoring the broader, nationwide context of silence, cover-ups, and willful in-action that so effectively enables rape culture to flourish.

But while honest and open dialogue concerning college sexual assaults is vital for any progress, we must recognize that it cannot end at dialogue. At some point, we, as an institution and as individuals, will have to push for change through actions rather than words. As MIT philosopher and feminist theorist Sally Haslangar put it during her visit to Rice, simple critique of rape culture and sexual violence is not enough. Our social movements must disrupt accepted terms, concepts and attitudes, and constantly challenge traditional ideologies, as well as the practices and values behind these ideologues, if they are to meaningfully change the social climate we live in. In other words, we need to DO things that challenge perceptions of rape culture and sexual violence, rather than just talk abut taking action — even if it pisses some people off. So far, it seems that only the MOB has done anything beyond engage in dialogue about sexual misconduct, yet they were not able to garner the support of either the administration or the student body. They did something; they disrupted experience and called into question the pervasive attitudes and perspectives that enable rape-tolerant attitudes. And yes, some people did not like it — but, so what.

While taking meaningful and concrete steps towards combating the willful ignorance and societal tendency to tip-toe around sensitive issues is challenging, we must figure it out together. In the words of Rice’s statement, “All of us have an obligation to address the matter [of sexual assault] with all the tools at our disposal.” Perhaps, just like the MOB, it is time to diversify our set of tools from simple dialogue to concrete action.