The allegations emerging from Cornell University in the United States have once again raised difficult questions about male peer culture, sexual behaviour and, perhaps most importantly, male silence. The details of individual cases must be established through the appropriate processes, but there is a wider question worth asking: What happens when men see behaviour from their friends that they know is wrong, but nobody speaks up?
Alongside the described actions of seven men who it is alleged have acted together in the rape of ‘Jane Doe’, it is the presence of multiple men on the Snapchat group who, despite being aware of the messages, have done nothing to intervene and stop the actions of the seven men. If one had done something there would likely be no story, and importantly, there would be no victim.
This is where Police Scotland’s That Guy campaign offers an interesting starting point. The campaign has deliberately moved beyond simply telling men not to commit sexual violence. It encourages men to recognise harmful behaviours and, importantly, to challenge them. Police Scotland’s research found that 67% of men aged 18–35 agreed that seeing more men speak out would make them feel more confident about doing so. That finding matters because male silence isn’t necessarily evidence that everyone in the group agrees with the behaviour more; it is evidence that many men fear a backlash from other men if they do intervene.
Imagine if we better communicated the evidence of what men truly feel. Now I understand that some of you reading may ask why men need permission from other men. I accept that, but it is the biggest inhibitor that stops men from acting in these moments. It’s not the bystander effect as many discuss; more, it’s a fear. When we reduce this fear, we increase the opportunity to prevent harm
The Power Of The Peer Group
Think about a group chat. Someone posts something degrading about a woman.
Most people see it. Nobody responds. The original poster may interpret that silence as approval. The next person sees the same silence and thinks: “I suppose this is just what we do here.” The behaviour becomes normalised. This is how culture can develop without anybody consciously deciding to create it and it isn’t confined to universities or fraternities. We see similar dynamics wherever strong peer identities develop: policing, the military, sport, hospitality, healthcare and other high-pressure environments.
The fear isn’t always fear of physical consequences. It can be fear of being labelled boring, weak, disloyal, not one of the lads. The person who challenges the group risks becoming the person outside the group. That is why simply telling people to “speak up” isn’t enough. We need to create permission to act.
What If Intervention Became Part Of Being A Good Mate?
Imagine changing the question. Instead of asking young men: “Would you ever sexually assault someone?” ask: “What would you do if your mate started talking about women in a degrading way?” Or: “What would you do if you saw something happening that you knew wasn’t right?”
Now we are talking about behaviour that happens before a serious incident and that is where active bystandership becomes powerful. Intervention doesn’t always mean confronting someone publicly. It might be: “Come on mate. That’s not funny.” Or: “I don’t think we should be talking about her like that.” Or privately: “Are you alright? That seemed out of character.” Or simply: “I’m not comfortable with this.”
Small interventions can interrupt a trajectory before it becomes something much more serious.
From That Guy to “Be That Guy”
There is an opportunity to take the message even further. Don’t be That Guy is an important message. But perhaps the next step is:
Be the guy who speaks up.
Be the guy who acts when a mate uses sexist language.
Be the guy who checks in.
Be the guy who doesn’t laugh when everyone else does.
Be the guy who changes the conversation.
This isn’t about creating a generation of men who are frightened of getting something wrong. It is about creating men who feel confident enough to do something right.
That distinction matters. If we rely entirely on punishment, formal reporting and intervention after harm has occurred, we have already missed countless opportunities to prevent it.
Active bystandership moves the intervention point earlier. It says that everyone has a role in creating the culture around them.
Silence Is A Cultural Issue
The Cornell story should therefore make us think beyond the individuals involved.
We should ask what happens inside male peer groups when harmful behaviour appears. Who challenges it? Who remains silent? Who thinks someone else will deal with it? And, crucially, what would make the next person more confident to act? Police Scotland’s That Guy campaign provides part of the answer: show men that other men care, permit them to speak, and provide practical ways of doing it.
Ultimately, changing male culture isn’t simply about preventing bad people from doing bad things. It is about empowering good people to act earlier. The goal shouldn’t simply be a culture where men say: “That’s not me.” It should be a culture where they are confident enough to say: “That’s not us.” and then do something about it.
