In conversations about social justice, we are constantly reminded to “assume best intentions,” to remind ourselves most people come from a good place. However, we are also taught to “recognize impact vs. intent.” While intent may be good, the road to hell is paved with good intentions.

Herein lies my conundrum regarding Men Against Rape and Sexual Assault, the men’s group at Northwestern designed to spark conversation on campus regarding rape culture on campus. I had applied to MARS this fall because I saw it as an opportunity to discuss and analyze the foundations of rape culture: toxic masculinity and heteronormativity. As a gay man who openly struggles with stereotypes of how I should perform my masculinity, this was especially important to me. I sought not only to break down campus rape culture, but also to begin to break down the toxic masculinity fueling it. MARS seeks to make this a focal point for its members, both new and returning; it was mentioned at the meeting that the upcoming orientation retreat for members, which will be held this Friday and Saturday, will center on discussions about masculinity.

This is commendable, and it speaks to its members’ awareness of their identity as (mostly) straight, (mostly) white men — they adhere to the box of masculinity they’re attempting to understand and break. MARS does contribute to a conversation much needed on campuses everywhere, something I proudly mentioned in my applicant interview. And yet I left the first meeting disillusioned enough by what I experienced that I was compelled to resign as a member. It was a jarring experience walking into my first MARS meeting and realizing I was possibly the only LGBT+ member, probably the only male not traditionally masculine, and definitely part of an extremely small number of men of color. And this raises a necessary question: How does MARS plan on representing the many faces of sexual assault when it doesn’t even represent the many men on campus?

In addition, if MARS plans on making discussions on masculinity a central part of its retreat, why is it not a focal point in the workshops they plan on holding on Winter Quarter?

The presentation model with which MARS frames this conversation, designed for fraternity pledge classes, is limited. It mentions, but fails to expand upon and address, the systemic web of complexities regarding toxic masculinity and the role of heteronormativity in campus discussion of sexual assault. It fails to challenge its audience.

And perhaps this is because they don’t know how to. Although toxic masculinity needs to be discussed, it is difficult, if not impossible, to grasp its full impact when most of the people leading such discussions are straight, white frat boys framing a presentation for pledge classes — an environment almost exclusively designed for straight white men. It will be difficult, if not impossible, to discuss the impact of heteronormativity on rape culture when it is brought up as little more than an aside before playing a heteronormative video for that same presentation. MARS frames the campus sexual assault narrative within its stereotypes, leaving little to no room for a wider discussion outside this white, cis framework. And as a result, it reinforces the same problems that MARS’ members acknowledge exist and need to be solved. There must be a more thoughtful, in-depth discussion on the issues behind campus rape culture, and MARS-facilitated workshops must be held to a higher standard: one that is more inclusive, that goes beyond merely mentioning the existence of other facets of rape culture.

I assumed, and still assume, best intentions in regards to MARS’ work, and I understand my judgment has stemmed from the course of one meeting of a group with a core message directed toward changing the current state of Greek life. But I left MARS anyway, and I have to address why. I have to address the fact that the Greek culture MARS spends the entirety of Winter Quarter addressing is implicitly designed to exclude people like me: gay men of color, especially those who don’t adhere to traditional perceptions of masculinity. I have to address that as a result of their focus, MARS’ foundation still rests on a heteronormative and binary perception of sexual assault, and framing such a vital conversation in this way only further marginalizes groups that do not fall into the lines of “cis straight (white) person who’s likely Greek.” I have to address the paradox I encountered when certain men discuss the problematic nature of ratios for party admission, after having recalled these same men rejecting groups from parties because their ratios were off.

I have to address MARS’ impact.

David Guirgis is a Medill freshman. He can be contacted at [email protected]. If you would like to respond publicly to this op-ed, send a Letter to the Editor to [email protected]. The views expressed in this piece do not necessarily reflect the views of all staff members of The Daily Northwestern.