Prohibited Conduct Definitions

The individual(s) reporting an alleged MIT policy violation and/or who submits a Formal Complaint of Discrimination or Discriminatory Harassment.

Effective Consent is:

• informed;
• freely and voluntarily given;
• mutually understandable words or actions which indicate willing participation in mutually agreed upon sexual activity.

Further:

By definition, effective consent cannot be obtained by:

• unreasonable pressure, which can generally be understood as conduct that pressures another person to “give in” to sexual activity rather than to choose freely to participate; factors that may be considered include (1) the frequency, nature, duration, and intensity of the requests for sexual activity; (2) whether and how previous requests were denied; and (3) whether the person initiating the sexual activity held a position of power over the other person;
• emotional intimidation, which can include (1) overtly degrading, humiliating, and shaming someone for not participating in sexual activity; (2) blackmail; and (3) threats to reputation;
• physical intimidation and threats, which can be communicated by words or conduct, and physical force.

Effective consent cannot be obtained from someone who is incapable of giving consent for any reason, including when:

• the person has a mental, intellectual, or physical disability that causes the person to be temporarily or permanently unable to give consent;
• the person is under the legal age to give consent;
• or the person is asleep, unconscious, physically helpless, or otherwise incapacitated, including by alcohol or other drugs.

An individual violates this policy if the individual initiates and engages in sexual activity with someone who is incapacitated, and (1) the individual knew the other person was incapacitated, or (2) a sober reasonable person under similar circumstances as the person initiating the sexual activity would have known the other person was incapacitated.

For purposes of the sex-based harassment policy, silence and passivity do not signal consent.

There is no requirement that a person express non-consent or that they resist a sexual advance or request. For example, someone might not consent to sexual activity even though they do not say “no” or physically resist in any way. Physical or verbal resistance is evidence that there was not effective consent.

​A factor that may be considered when evaluating consent is whether, under similar circumstances as the person initiating the sexual activity, a sober reasonable person would have concluded that there was effective consent.

It is important for those who initiate sexual activity to understand that:

• even though someone gave effective consent to sexual activity in the past, that does not mean they have given effective consent to sexual activity in the future;
• even though someone gives effective consent to one type of sexual activity during a sexual interaction, that does not automatically mean they have given effective consent to other types of sexual activity;
• effective consent can be withdrawn at any time, and once a person withdraws effective consent, the other person must stop.

Effective consent is clearest when obtained through direct communication about the decision to engage in specific sexual activity. Effective consent need not be verbal, but verbal communication is the most reliable and effective way to seek, assess, and obtain consent. Nonverbal communication can be ambiguous. For example, heavy breathing or moaning can be a sign of arousal, but it can also be a sign of distress. Talking with sexual partners about desires, intentions, boundaries, and limits can be uncomfortable, but it serves as a strong foundation for respectful, healthy, positive, and safe intimate relationships.

Faculty members, senior research scientists, senior research engineers, senior research associates, staff members, and postdoctoral scholars.

Incapacitation is the physical and/or mental inability to make informed, rational judgments and decisions. Someone is incapacitated if they are asleep or unconscious. Someone can also be incapacitated by alcohol or other substances. Incapacitation is not determined by technical or medical definitions. The question is whether a person has the physical and/or mental ability to make informed, rational judgments and decisions.

Where alcohol and/or other substances are involved, incapacitation is determined by how the substance impacts a person’s decision-making capacity, awareness of consequences, and ability to make informed judgments. Incapacitation is a state beyond drunkenness or intoxication, and a person is not incapacitated merely because they have been drinking and/or using drugs. An inability to remember events is not sufficient to demonstrate incapacitation, as a person may be able to make and act on a considered decision to engage in sexual activity, but not remember having done so.

Because the impact of alcohol and other substances varies from person to person, one should be cautious before engaging in sexual contact or intercourse when either person has been drinking alcohol or using other drugs. The use of alcohol or other drugs may create ambiguity about consent. It is especially important, therefore, that anyone initiating sexual activity is aware of their own level of intoxication as it may impact their ability to assess another person’s capacity to give consent. Being intoxicated or impaired by drugs or alcohol does not excuse one from the responsibility to obtain consent. Being intoxicated or impaired by alcohol and/or other substances is never an excuse to commit sexual misconduct. If there is any doubt about either party’s level of intoxication, the safe thing to do is to forgo all sexual activity.

Although each individual is different, there are some common and observable signs that someone is incapacitated or approaching incapacitation, including, but not limited to, slurred or incomprehensible speech, unsteady gait, combativeness, emotional volatility, vomiting, or incontinence. A person may appear to be giving consent but may not have the capacity to do so. When determining whether a person has the capacity to provide consent, the Institute will consider whether a sober, reasonable person in the same position knew or should have known whether the other party could or could not consent to the sexual activity. A Respondent’s impairment at the time of the incident as a result of alcohol and/or other substances does not diminish the Respondent’s responsibility for violations of the Institute’s sex-based harassment policies.

A Complainant may request Informal Remedies such as an educational conversation, educational workshop, or Mutual No Contact Order (MNCO). These may be facilitated by IDHR or in consultation with IDHR. Informal Remedies may also be offered by Human Resources (HR) or the Ombuds Office.

An individual’s actual or perceived race, color, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, pregnancy or related conditions, religion, disability, age, genetic information, veteran status, or national or ethnic origin.

The individual(s) accused of violating an MIT policy.

Students enrolled for undergraduate degree programs and graduate degree programs, and visiting students.

Supportive measures are non-disciplinary, non-punitive individualized services offered as appropriate, as reasonably available, and without fee or charge to the parties. Supportive measures may be offered, as appropriate, to either or both the Complainant or Respondent prior to an investigation or while an investigation is pending. They are provided to restore or preserve access to the Institute’s education program or activity, including measures designed to protect the safety of all parties or the Institute’s educational environment, and/or deter discriminatory harassment, discrimination, and/or retaliation. These actions may include, but are not limited to, housing alterations, referrals to visa and immigration assistance, and workplace and academic modifications.

Adaptable Resolution offers voluntary, remedies-based, structured processes—like mediation or restorative justice conferencing—that allows the Impacted Party or Parties to agree to a resolution without disciplinary action against the Responding Party (the person or persons accused of the harmful conduct). It is designed to allow a Responding Party to acknowledge the impact of their behavior and accept responsibility for repairing harm, to the extent possible, experienced by the Impacted Party and/or the MIT community.

If at any point in the Formal Complaint Process the Complainant decides that they do not wish to continue moving forward with the process, they may choose to withdraw their complaint. If an Investigation process is underway and IDHR judges the complaint to be of serious enough consequence for the wider MIT community, and there is enough information for the case to be resolved, IDHR will continue the investigation as an Administrative Complaint.

Decision-makers make determinations regarding responsibility for policy/policies violation(s), sanctions, and appeals. The Institute has selected the Decision-Makers for all stages of the Discrimination or Discriminatory Harassment Formal Complaint process to comply with applicable laws and to best correspond to the Institute’s different constituencies. Find more information on designated decision-makers.

When a complainant indicates they would like to pursue a Resolution Pathway, IDHR conducts an Initial Assessment of the concerns to determine whether the behavior described may implicate a Discrimination and/or Discriminatory Harassment policy or if it is better suited for another office. An Initial Assessment consists of a review of the available information. At its discretion, IDHR may meet with the Complainant to gather a more complete understanding of the allegations. This is called an Initial Assessment interview.

A document or an online form submitted to the Institute Harassment & Discrimination Response office (IDHR) alleging a violation of one or more of the Institute’s Discrimination & Discriminatory Harassment policies.  

A Formal Complaint should:

• State the name of the Respondent (if known);
• Describe with reasonable specificity the conduct the Complainant believes violated MIT policy, including, if applicable, the date, time, and location of the conduct (if known);
• Be in the Complainant’s own words, although the Complainant may have assistance in preparing the Formal Complaint and may attach relevant documentation;
• Contain the Complainant’s physical or digital signature, or otherwise indicate that the Complainant is the person filing the Formal Complaint.

A complaint of sex discrimination, including sexual harassment. A Formal Complaint of Title IX Sexual Harassment is a document filed by a complainant or signed by the Title IX Coordinator alleging sexual harassment against a respondent and requesting that MIT investigate the allegation of sexual harassment. The Title IX Formal Complaint must contain the complainant’s physical or digital signature, or otherwise indicate that the complainant is the person filing the formal complaint.

The Investigation Process is a Formal Complaint pathway that can be initiated to determine whether an MIT policy was violated. IDHR’s Investigation Guide provides detailed information on the Investigation process.

Led by a trained facilitator, facilitated dialogues helps parties–individuals or groups–engage in productive conversations around concerns. Facilitated dialogue is not necessarily designed to produce or work toward a set of agreements, but can serve that purpose. The goal is to create a safe environment for participants to consider other perspectives, build mutual understanding, and find resolution to the concerns.

Negotiated resolutions allow parties to agree to focus on remedies and outcomes to address the concerns without engaging in a direct dialogue process. This is particularly useful when parties have exhausted dialogue through other avenues and are seeking to formalize a resolution agreement without continued discussion on the matter of concern.

In restorative justice conferencing, the Responding Party is involved in face-to-face dialogue with the people who were most affected by the person’s behavior. This type of process can be effective in cases where the harmful behavior may have a wider impact on the community. The group of people may involve supporters of the Responding Party and the impacted parties. Each person has the opportunity to speak and be heard in non-adversarial discussion, including expressing concerns about the Responding Party’s behavior. Once the group discusses the incident and identifies the harm done, members then work toward a consensus and agreement on how the Responding Party can repair the harm and the actions they can take to make better choices in the future.

An Administrative Complaint is a Formal Complaint, that has passed Initial Assessment, filed by IDHR where:

• An alleged policy violation is raised about an MIT student, staff member, or faculty member by a non-MIT community member;
• The individual who was allegedly subjected to the reported conduct does not want to initiate an investigation process or serve as the Complainant; or
• IDHR receives multiple reports about the same or similar conduct.

Administrative Complaints are opened when, in the judgment of IDHR, the concern warrants investigation and is feasible under the circumstances.

Both Complainants and Respondents have the right to select an advisor who may accompany the party throughout the Investigation Process. Advisors may not speak on the party’s behalf or otherwise interfere with meetings or proceedings. For further details on advisors please see Section 10.1 of the IDHR Investigation Guide.

In matters involving staff and faculty Respondents, P&P, Section 9.8 governs who may serve as an advisor. For matters involving staff and faculty Respondents, advisors must be a member of the MIT community and may not be family members, subordinates, or attorneys. In cases alleging a violation of Section 9.5.1 Sexual Harassment, Section 9.5.2.1 Sexual Misconduct, Section 9.5.1.3 Gender-Based Harassment, Section 9.5.1.4 Title IX Sexual Harassment, or Section 9.5.2 Stalking, or the corresponding policies in the Mind and Hand Book, the parties may have an advisor who is an attorney or person outside the MIT community, as long as that person is not a witness or party to the Complaint. In matters involving student Respondents, COD Rules govern who may serve as an advisor. For matters involving student Respondents, the complainant and the respondent each may have one advisor, who may be any person of their choice except a member of the media or an attorney, with the exception that attorneys are permitted to serve as advisors to complainants and respondents in cases involving allegations of sexual misconduct, sexual harassment, intimate partner violence, or stalking, including Title IX Sexual Harassment, or as otherwise required by law.

IDHR assigns a trained, neutral investigator(s) to conduct an Investigation. The investigator(s) will not have or demonstrate a conflict of interest or bias for a party generally, or for a specific Complainant or Respondent.

A Notice Letter is written notice of the Investigation and allegations provided to the complainant and respondent. An Investigation begins when a Notice Letter is issued to both parties.

When referred to together, the complainant and respondent may be called “the parties.”

The evidentiary standard used when making findings of fact. Preponderance of the evidence is proof by information that, compared with the information opposing it, leads to a conclusion that the fact at issue is more probably true than not.

Individuals who may have experience with or knowledge of events, issues, or circumstances related to an IDHR Investigation are referred to as witnesses.

The COD resolves complaints of alleged violations of policies and/or community standards by a student, former student, student organization, or residence hall in a way that is objective and educational, and is not intended to be legalistic or adversarial.

A meeting with members of the COD who determine whether a policy has been violated.

A panel of three tenured faculty members who determine whether there is a violation of a Conduct Policy when the Respondent is a faculty member, a senior research scientist, senior research engineer, or senior research associate. The three members serving on a particular Faculty Panel are selected from the pool of trained faculty members by the Executive Vice Provost.

The determination by decision-makers as to whether a specific conduct policy has been violated.

• Not Responsible—A finding by a decision-maker that a respondent has been found by a preponderance of the evidence to not have violated a specific conduct policy.
• Responsible—A finding by a decision-maker that a respondent has been found by a preponderance of the evidence to have violated a specific conduct policy.

An Institute response to a violation of a conduct policy. The COD Rules outlines the range of possible sanctions for students, student organizations, former students, and residence halls. P&P Section 9.8.5.4 outlines the range of possible sanctions for staff members and postdocs. P&P Section 9.8.5.3 and P&P Section 3.4.2 outlines the range of possible sanctions for faculty.

Incest is nonforcible sexual intercourse between persons who are related to each other within the degrees wherein marriage is prohibited by law.

MIT prohibits intimate partner violence. Intimate Partner Violence is defined as actual or threatened physical violence, intimidation, or other forms of physical or sexual abuse directed toward a partner in an intimate relationship that would cause a reasonable person to fear harm to self or others. For this policy, “intimate relationship” means marriage, domestic partnership, engagement, casual or serious romantic involvement, and dating, whether current or former. Intimate Partner Violence can occur between persons of any gender identity, any sexual orientation, and it can occur in any type of intimate relationship including monogamous, non-committed, and relationships involving more than two partners. Intimate Partner Violence can be a single act or a pattern of behavior. Intimate Partner Violence also includes, without limitation, dating violence and domestic violence as defined by the Clery Act.

• Dating Violence:

Dating violence is prohibited by MIT. It is defined as violence committed by a person:

• Who is or has been in a social relationship of a romantic or intimate nature with the victim; and
• Where the existence of such a relationship shall be determined based on a consideration of the following factors:
  1. The length of the relationship;
  2. The type of relationship; and
  3. The frequency of interaction between the persons involved in the relationship.

Dating violence can occur between persons of any gender identity, any sexual orientation, and it can occur in any type of intimate relationship including monogamous, non-committed, and relationships involving more than two partners.

Dating violence can take many forms. Examples include, but are not limited to, situations in which the following behaviors are directed toward a partner in a current or former intimate relationship: hitting, kicking, punching, strangling, or other violence; property damage; and threat of violence to one’s self, one’s partner, or the family members, friends, pets, or personal property of the partner.

• Domestic Violence:

Domestic violence is prohibited by MIT. It is defined as a felony or misdemeanor crime of violence committed by a person who:

• Is a current or former spouse or intimate partner of the victim under the family or domestic violence laws of Massachusetts, or a person similarly situated to a spouse of the victim;
• Is cohabitating with, or has cohabitated, with the victim as a spouse or intimate partner;
• Shares a child in common with the victim; or
• Commits acts against a youth or adult victim who is protected from that person’s acts under the domestic or family violence laws of the jurisdiction.

To be considered domestic violence, the relationship must be more than just two people living together as roommates.

Domestic violence can take many forms. Examples include, but are not limited to, situations in which the following behaviors are directed toward a partner in a current or former intimate relationship: hitting, kicking, punching, strangling, or other violence; property damage; and threat of violence to one’s self, one’s partner, or the family members, friends, pets, or personal property of the partner.

Retaliation is any adverse action, including intimidation, discrimination, harassment, threats, coercion or other conduct that would discourage a reasonable person from making a report or participating in a complaint review process. MIT’s non-retaliation policy protects those who report an incident, file a complaint, or otherwise raise a concern about a policy violation or other wrongdoing; these individuals are sometimes called whistleblowers. The non-retaliation policy also protects those who review or investigate a complaint or concern; serve as a witness, provide background, or otherwise participate in the review or investigation of a complaint or concern (or who choose not to); or who make decisions or recommendations about policy violations or sanctions in any of the Institute’s complaint resolution procedures. Retaliation may occur even where there is no finding of a policy violation, and a complaint of retaliation may be addressed independently through MIT’s complaint resolution process.

Sexual assault is prohibited by MIT. It is defined as any sexual act directed against another person, without the consent of the victim, including

instances where the victim is incapable of giving consent. Sexual assault can occur between individuals of the same or different sexes and/or genders.

Sex offenses under the uniform crime reporting system of the FBI are:

• Rape (Except Statutory Rape)—penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim. This definition also includes instances in which the victim is incapable of giving consent because of temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity (including due to the influence of drugs or alcohol) or because of age. Physical resistance is not required on the part of the victim to demonstrate lack of consent.
• Criminal sexual contact (formerly referred to as “fondling”) — The intentional touching of the clothed or unclothed body parts without consent of the victim for the purpose of sexual degradation, sexual gratification, or sexual humiliation. The forced touching by the victim of the actor’s clothed or unclothed body parts, without consent of the victim for the purpose of sexual degradation, sexual gratification, or sexual humiliation.

Sexual exploitation is prohibited by MIT. It is defined as taking sexual advantage of someone without consent, or violating someone’s sexual privacy without consent, and includes, but is not limited to: 

• Providing alcohol or other drugs to someone without that person’s knowledge, or unreasonably pressuring the person to consume alcohol or drugs, with the purpose of causing incapacitation in order for one to take sexual advantage of the person.
• Recording, photographing, transmitting, or allowing another to view sex-based images, videos, or similar media involving another person or their likeness.
• Allowing third parties to observe private sexual acts.
• Voyeurism, including by electronic means.
• Indecent exposure.

Knowingly or recklessly exposing another person to a significant risk of sexually transmitted infection, including HIV, without their knowledge.

Sexual harassment is unwelcome conduct of a sexual nature, such as unwelcome sexual advances, requests for sexual favors, or other verbal, nonverbal, or physical conduct of a sexual nature, when:

• The conduct is sufficiently severe or pervasive that a reasonable person would consider it intimidating, hostile or abusive and it adversely affects an individual’s educational, work, or living environment.
• Submission to such conduct is made either explicitly or implicitly a term or condition of an individual’s employment or academic standing; or

• Submission to or rejection of such conduct by an individual is used as the basis for significant employment decisions (such as advancement, performance evaluation, or work schedule) or academic decisions (such as grading or letters of recommendation) affecting that individual; or

Stalking, whether or not sexual in nature, is prohibited by MIT. Stalking is defined as engaging in a course of conduct directed at a specific person that would cause a reasonable person to fear for their safety or the safety of others, or to suffer substantial emotional distress.

Stalking can take many forms. Examples include, but are not limited to, two or more instances of the following conduct (that also meet the definition of stalking above): following a person; appearing at a person’s home, class, or work; continuing to contact a person after receiving requests not to; leaving written messages, objects, or unwanted gifts; vandalizing a person’s property; photographing a person; and other threatening, intimidating or intrusive conduct. Stalking may also involve the use of electronic media such as the internet, social networks, blogs, cell phones, texts, or other similar devices (often referred to as cyber-stalking). Such conduct may include, but is not limited to, non-consensual communication, telephone calls, voice messages, emails, texts, letters, notes, gifts, or any other communications that are repeated and undesired.

Statutory Rape is nonforcible sexual intercourse with a person who is under the statutory age of consent.

Conduct on the basis of sex that satisfies one or more of the following

1. An employee of MIT conditioning the provision of an aid, benefit, or service of MIT on an individual’s participation in unwelcome sexual conduct;
2. Unwelcome conduct determined by a reasonable person to be so severe, pervasive, and objectively offensive that it effectively denies a person equal access to MIT’s education program or activity; or
3. “Sexual assault,” “dating violence,” “domestic violence,” or “stalking,” as defined by federal law and set out on the Institute Discrimination and Harassment Response (IDHR) website. 

MIT must follow the specific processes cited below when it receives a formal complaint of Title IX Sexual Harassment and where all of the following apply:

1. The alleged conduct occurred against a person in the United States.
2. At the time of filing a formal complaint, the Complainant was/is participating in or attempting to participate in the education program or activity at MIT;
3. The alleged conduct occurred in an education program or activity controlled by MIT; and