Purpose The purpose of this paper is to use the authors’ reflections and a review of literature to assess the ways that universities have yet to fully include faculty members in their sexual assault prevention initiatives. Recommendations for how faculty can assist are included. Design/methodology/approach The paper provides a review of literature regarding institutional factors related to sexual assault and the potential of faculty, followed by personal reflections by both authors, who together have more than four decades experience studying sexual assault, providing training and educational presentations, and serving victims as well as perpetrators of sexual violence. Findings The authors conclude that, despite White House mandates for training faculty and campus requirements that should utilize the expertise of faculty members, many campuses are relying heavily or exclusively on student affairs professionals and lawyers to create and implement sexual assault prevention programs. Faculty should, the authors assert, be involved in task forces, needs assessments, training, and other initiatives in order for campus prevention programs to be robust. Research limitations/implications The limitations of this paper are that it is based only on a review of literature and personal reflections from the authors, who teach at a small, Catholic, liberal arts school in South Florida. As such, the recommendations, while intended to be thoughtful, may be less appropriate for educators and administrators at different types of colleges or outside of the USA. Additional research on faculty experience with sexual assault prevention is recommended. Practical implications The recommendations provided in the paper should be useful to academic leaders who are developing or expanding sexual assault prevention initiatives. The paper also provides useful information for faculty members regarding how they can assist with these issues. Social implications Faculty members with training and expertise can and should be used to help craft campus policies, procedures, and programs related to sexual assault. In the USA, sexual assault training is required but has not been fully implemented. Originality/value Although much has been written about campus sexual assault, little research assesses the role of faculty. This paper is a preliminary effort to address how interpretations of US federal law include faculty and how faculty remain an untapped resource in terms of sexual assault prevention.

This article examines the rhetoric used by President Trump and his administration with respect to immigrants and immigration policy. We argue that Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric can be understood as (1) a response against current norms associated with political correctness, which include a heightened sensitivity to racially offensive language, xenophobia, and social injustice, and (2) a rejection of the tendency to subordinate patriotism, U.S. sovereignty, and national interests to a neoliberal political economy that emphasizes “globalism” and prioritizes “free trade” over the interests of working Americans. In order to highlight how much of Trump’s anti-immigrant rhetoric is developed as a response to political correctness and the neoliberal tendency toward globalism, we employ the concept of “collective action frames” to suggest that Trump’s (and much of the Right’s) efforts to legitimize their strict agenda on immigration relies on frames related to (1) crime and the threat immigrants pose to Americans’ safety, (2) the notion that immigrants and free trade deals lower Americans’ wages and compromise their job security, and (3) the claim that Democrats and other liberals are driven by a politically correct orthodoxy that hurts American workers by being “weak on immigration” and supportive of “open borders.” The article concludes with recommendations for fighting the normalization of scapegoating immigrants.

No abstract

No abstract

No abstract