Sex assault is a felony and anyone who chooses not to report a felony is doing the community a huge disservice. Anyone who is convicted of a felony should be expelled forthwith (and guessing that happens). If the degree has been earned prior to the conviction it should be revoked. But unless it’s reported, it’s an injustice to punish a group of citizens and students who have committed no crime. And yes, unless they are charged and convicted, you can’t know whether they have committed a crime, despite your allegations.
My kid has been counseled on how to avoid being in situations where such felonies can easily occur. That doesn’t eliminate the risk, but it lowers it significantly. No one is obligated to attend a party where they feel there is high risk of felonious behavior to occur.
Parties with an-allegedly insensitive theme are just that. They are neither illegal nor are they immoral according to all views. One person’s fun Mexican-themed party is another person’s cultural appropriation. Do people really expect the university to micro-manage these issues? According to whose point of view? Don’t forget, too, that in the name of justice you really have to monitor the following additional events due to the problematic ways they are commonly celebrated and/or fears of appropriation or conflicting messaging: Oktoberfest, Halloween, Thanksgiving, Christmas, Valentine’s, St. Pat’s, Mardi-Gras, and Easter. As a university community, is it really necessary to go that route?
Frankly, I’m quite surprised that the court of public opinion - that is, members of the student body - can’t condemn the truly offensive behavior by refusing to associate with it and with those who allegedly perpetuate it. Perhaps the source of this confusion is that not everyone in the student body agrees on whether the behavior is as offensive as you are stating. Perhaps that’s why some groups are taking the (unfortunately) not-so-extraordinary step of demanding that the University of Chicago devote resources to protecting - and ENFORCING - their specific point of view.
As a private uni, UChicago can certainly go the Harvard route. But that’s a pretty significant departure from it’s core principles.
Your last statement - somehow advocating that certain offensive students be treated similarly to outside groups - just makes no sense. The university has no obligation to those outside groups in the slightest, as you know, and can act on those as it chooses for the good of the entire university community. To demote select students to the status of “outsider” would be a gross violation of the principles that have guided the university’s relationship with its students for decades now. Let’s leave the “outsiders” outside the realm of the discussion - BOTH sides of the discussion. If we are to respect the legitimate student issues prompting these demands, then let’s also advocate for outcomes that adhere to the special relationship between the university and its student body on the fundamental matters of speech, expression, and association.