Skip to Main Navigation | Skip to Content




Other Important Definitions:

What is Consent? 

With all cases of a sexual nature, "consent" is defined as positive cooperation in an act or behavior.

Any member of the University community who encourages, aids, assists or participates in any act of sexual misconduct against another will also be considered to have committed a violation of University policy.

Incapacitation is a state where someone cannot make rational, reasonable decisions because they lack the capacity to give knowing consent (e.g., to understand the "who, what, when, where, why or how" of their sexual interaction). Sexual activity with someone who is known to be - or based on the circumstances should reasonably have known to be - mentally or physically incapacitated (by alcohol or other drug use, unconsciousness or blackout), constitutes a violation of this policy.

This policy also covers a person whose incapacity results from mental disability, sleep, involuntary physical restraint, or from the taking of rape drugs. Possession, use and/or distribution of any of these substances, including Rohypnol, Ketomine, GHB, Burundanga, etc. is prohibited, and administering one of these drugs to another student is a violation of this policy. More information on these drugs can be found at http://www.911rape.org/

Use of alcohol or other drugs will not function as a defense to a violation of this policy. 

The sexual orientation and/or gender identity of individuals engaging in sexual activity is not relevant to allegations under this policy.

What is Force?

Force is the use of physical violence and/or imposing on someone physically to gain sexual access. Force also includes threats, intimidation (implied threats) and coercion that overcome resistance or produce consent.

What is Coercion?

Coercion is unreasonable pressure for sexual activity. Coercive behavior differs from seductive behavior based on the type of pressure someone uses to get consent from another. When someone makes clear to you that they do not want sex, that they want to stop, or that they do not want to go past a certain point of sexual interaction, continued pressure beyond that point can be coercive. 

Complainant, Respondent and Bystander

Many situations that could be violations of the sexual misconduct policy involve 2 people. We refer to these individuals as the complainant and the respondent. Other situations are more complex and may involve one or more complainants and one or more respondents. These definitions do not imply any legal wrongdoing. The university’s process is designed to determine whether or not a respondent has violated policy, remediate the situation, and prevent future harm.

The Preponderance of the Evidence Standard

The preponderance of the evidence standard requires proving it is more likely than not that sexual violence occurred. This is the standard of proof that must be used in a school’s Title IX proceedings, including fact finding and hearing procedures for resolving complaints of student-on-student sexual violence.

What is Retaliation?

Retaliation is the act of intimidating, threatening, coercing, or in any way discriminating against an individual because of the individual’s informal or formal complaint or participation in a school or Office of Civil Rights (OCR) investigation or proceedings related to sexual violence or other civil rights concerns. Federal civil rights laws, including Title IX, make it unlawful to retaliate against an individual for the purpose of interfering with any right or privilege secured by these laws. UCM will not allow any form of retaliation against complainants. Please notify the Title IX Coordinator or the Office of Public Safety immediately if you believe you are the subject of retaliation.

Retaliatory Complaints

It is not uncommon for the respondent(s) in sexual misconduct cases to assert counter claims against the complainant(s). These complaints may constitute a form of retaliation intended to silence or punish the complainant(s). The university will inform the complainant(s) of retaliatory complaints and reserves the right, under careful evaluation, to decline action on retaliatory complaints by the respondent(s).