Sexual violence has been a highly prevalent problem on university campuses in the United States for decades. Title IX of the Educational Amendments of 1972 banned sex-based discrimination in schools, which was, years later, understood to include sexual violence. As with any law, decades of the building of social meaning around the law's scope and meaning ensued. Sociologists generally argue that organizations do the bare minimum to meet social meanings of “compliance” with law, and prioritize social appearances over meeting the goal of the law. Here I test that assertion in looking at how universities have responded to a specific portion of Title IX law. Since 1975 schools must designate at least one employee to handle Title IX compliance. Here I investigate how universities have responded to this mandate via an online survey I conducted of 400 Title IX employees in 2019. I achieved an institutional response rate of 33%.I first present a description of the structure of Title IX employee designation, finding that universities have many Title IX employees, and not merely one as seems to have been an operating assumption by previous researchers of Title IX. I find that about 40% of universities have a sole-role Title IX employee, which is higher than previous estimates have found. And while I find that universities more sensitive to their legal environments have been more likely to establish sole-role Title IX employees or have numerous Title IX employees compared to their less sensitive counterparts, these effects largely disappear when bringing in time. Essentially, time is the main predictor for whether institutions establish sole-role Title IX employees. I test whether the establishment of a sole-role Title IX employee leads to a bump in formal reports of sex offenses, indicating a positive outcome. I do not find evidence that sole-role Title IX employees are a substantive structure that move universities closer toward meeting the goal of the law. I explain that sole-role Title IX employees may not be effective because one full-time employee is still not enough to prevent, respond to, investigate, and adjudicate sexual violence in a campus community. I conclude that there is much more work that needs to be done, and Title IX employees need more support and resources from their administrations if that work is to ever be fully successful. / Sociology

Thèse de doctorat présenté en vue de l'obtention du doctorat en psychologie - recherche intervention, option psychologie clinique (Ph.D) / Les violences sexistes et sexuelles constituent un enjeu majeur dans les universités et depuis #MeToo, plusieurs mobilisations ont émergé à travers le monde pour les dénoncer (Tadros et Edwards, 2020). Le sujet des violences sexuelles subies par les étudiants de l’international a reçu trop peu d’attention, et ce, en dépit de décennies de recherches sur ces violences et sur les expériences de cette population (Lee, 2018). Ces étudiants sont d’ailleurs considérés comme étant « particulièrement vulnérables », notamment en raison de caractéristiques individuelles (p. ex. origine ethnique) (Bonistall Postel, 2020). Toutefois, cette perspective peut renforcer des stéréotypes à l’égard de cette population et donner lieu à des recommandations pour la prévention qui sont inutiles, voire dommageables (Hutcheson, 2020 ; Todorova et al., 2022). De plus, elle néglige à la fois les inégalités reliées au statut et celles associées à d’autres positions sociales (p. ex. le genre, l’identité sexuelle). Le statut d’étudiant international implique des restrictions en matière de droits, de ressources et de privilèges, entrainant ainsi d’importantes conséquences sur la sécurité de ces étudiants (Marginson et al., 2010). Dénominateur commun d’une population très hétérogène, le statut d’étudiant international peut également amplifier des enjeux auxquels les étudiants nationaux sont aussi confrontés (p. ex. sexisme, racisme, homophobie) (Marginson et al., 2012). Adopter une approche intersectionnelle permet de comprendre comment ces enjeux s’entrecroisent et se renforcent mutuellement. En quoi les expériences de ces étudiants diffèrent-elles des autres ? Cette population est-elle particulièrement à risque ? Comment réduire ce risque ? L’état des connaissances actuelles, tant au Canada qu’à l’international, ne permet ni de répondre à ces questionnements ni d’orienter adéquatement les efforts de prévention et d’intervention. Cette recherche doctorale répond à ces lacunes par le biais trois études. La première étude a comparé les expériences de violences sexuelles des populations étudiantes universitaires (nationale/internationale), en examinant les formes de ces violences (p. ex. harcèlement sexuel), leur contexte, leurs conséquences et leur dévoilement. La deuxième étude a analysé le risque associé au statut d’étudiante internationale à travers le temps et examiné les intersections entre le statut et quatre facteurs de risque (p. ex. l’exposition à la maltraitance durant l’enfance). La troisième étude a identifié des mesures préventives qui permettraient de diminuer l’incidence des agressions sexuelles auprès de femmes de premier cycle. Les résultats de ces trois études révèlent que les expériences de violences sexuelles des deux populations sont généralement similaires, toutefois les étudiants de l’international rapportent une fréquence plus élevée de certaines formes de violences. Le risque associé au statut ne s’explique pas uniquement par des caractéristiques individuelles (p. ex. le genre, l’identité sexuelle, la minorité visible) ou psychologiques (p. ex. croyances et attitudes envers les agressions sexuelles, perception du risque). Les analyses intersectionnelles suggèrent que le statut d’étudiant international est associé à des effets complexes et hétérogènes. Les contributions théoriques, empiriques et pratiques de cette recherche doctorale soulignent la nécessité d’une approche intersectionnelle et multidisciplinaire. Il est nécessaire de reconnaitre que les violences sexuelles dans les universités sont un enjeu transnational et de créer des solidarités au service de luttes communes. / Gender-based sexual violence is a major concern in higher education institutions and since #MeToo, several movements have emerged around the world to condemn this issue (Tadros & Edwards, 2020). The topic of sexual violence against international students has received little attention, despite decades of research on sexual violence and on the experiences of this population (Lee, 2018). These students are seen as a "particularly vulnerable population" due to personal characteristics (e.g. ethnic origin) (Bonistall Postel, 2020). However, this perspective can reinforce stereotypes towards this population and can lead to ineffective and harmful interventions (Hutcheson, 2020; Todorova et al., 2022). Additionally, it overlooks inequalities related to student status and across other social positions (e.g., gender, sexual identity). International student status involves a restricted access to rights, resources and privileges which has significant implications for their security (Marginson et al., 2010). While a common denominator of a very heterogeneous population, international student status can also amplify issues that domestic students also face (e.g., sexism, racism, homophobia) (Marginson et al., 2012). Using an intersectional framework is necessary to understand how these issues intersect and reinforce each other. How do international students’ experiences of sexual violence differ from those of other students? Are they particularly at risk? How could this risk be reduced ? The existing body of knowledge, both in Canada and globally, is insufficient to answer these questions or to guide prevention and intervention efforts. To address these gaps, three studies were conducted in this doctoral research. The first study compared the experiences of sexual violence among university students (domestic/international), examining the type of assaults (e.g., sexual harassment), their context, their consequences, and the disclosure of events. The second study investigated the risk associated with international student status over time and examined the intersections between student status and four risk factors (e.g., exposure to childhood maltreatment). The third study identified interventions that would reduce the incidence of sexual assault among undergraduate women. The results of these three studies reveal that the experiences of sexual violence for both populations are generally similar, however international students report a higher frequency of some forms of sexual violence. The risk associated with status is not entirely explained by individual characteristics (e.g., gender, sexual identity, visible minority) or psychological dispositions (e.g., beliefs and attitudes towards sexual assault, risk perception). Intersectional analyses suggest that international student status is associated with complex and heterogeneous effects. The theoretical, empirical, and practical contributions of this doctoral research emphasize the need for an intersectional and multidisciplinary approach. It is essential to recognize that sexual violence in higher education is a transnational issue and to create solidarities to work against common struggles.