Due to the allegations that Athletic Director John Chadima assaulted a student worker at a party while in a California hotel, University of Wisconsin Chancellor David Ward has suggested the university alcohol policy should be subjected to a review. If you failed to follow that, it’s because it makes no sense.

Since the incident report was released last week detailing that alcohol was bought and provided by the Athletic Department to student employees who were minors, people have questioned the advisability of such a practice. While I see the merit of the school not providing to minors, I confess to being bewildered about how the sexual assault has anything to do with that. By pushing the focus from the abysmally licentious behavior of Chadima to the easy target of alcohol, Ward has at once pardoned the accused Chadima and incited undue alarm about the role of alcohol on campus.

Let this be clear: If the investigation is correct, this was not an alcohol-induced lapse in judgment. In the report, the committee examined Chadima’s phone records and found that the night before the party, Chadima had texted a different student worker than the one who was assaulted, and “demanded that the student come to Chadima’s J.W. Marriott Hotel suite and threatened to fire him if he did not comply.” One can only speculate about the reasons Chadima wanted this other student there, but considering the assaulted student reported Chadima had used similar language, our speculations grow gloomy.

Whatever may be the case, one thing is clear: This was not the first time Chadima had abused his position of authority and leadership over students. The idea that this could somehow be turned into a message for substance abstinence or a lesson about the dangers of alcohol is ridiculous. Unless Chadima was plastered the night before as well, this had nothing to do with his intoxication; and even if he was, alcohol should not cause him to attempt to force himself on a student.

That two-dozen under-aged students were able to get through their night of Dionysian revelry without ambushing an underling seems to escape those who would turn this into an opportunity to enforce some teetotaling policy. Both lecherous predators and those charged with keeping an eye out for them find alcohol a fine excuse when something goes wrong.

In a statement last week, Chadima contradicted himself, saying, “[I] make no excuses … alcohol had controlled and consumed my life. Chadima offered up alcohol as an excuse, which Ward and others have graciously accepted, continuing the long tradition of people and institutions that hide misconduct behind the narrative of an out-of-control alcoholic culture.

Alcohol, especially on college campuses across the nation, has become a convenient device by which the moral transgressions of a few are projected onto the many. Despite frequent imbibing, the vast majority will never engage in criminal, especially unethical, activity. To say that alcohol is the problem diverts attention from the perpetrators to the anonymous, drinking multitude. This association is not only unjustified, but immoral. Even the most ardent alcoholic should refuse to take responsibility for the misconduct of others.

There is no need for a revision of the university’s alcohol policy to become a priority, and neither is there a need to go on ruminating over conspiracy theories placing alcohol as the second shooter. There was only one person responsible for the whole affair, and responsibility should be given to whom it is due.

Vincent Dumas ([email protected]) is a senior majoring in history and philosophy and minoring in computer science.