cause harm to her educational status and experience and of course it did she ended up with a drawing from providence college that's certainly a negative effect but in terms of the title expressly covers the three types of discrimination that are separately covered is discrimination in admissions we don't know much that and that would certainly apply if we were saying that brown discriminated under that category the second is discrimination in the benefits and services i would argue that that shouldn't necessarily be limited to only brown university students but that may be for another day we're not making that claim either i think it's under the third category which is discrimination subject to discrimination under the funding recipient that's a separate basis provide ability it's a separate type of claim and it doesn't m theory is that they are absolutely responsible for sex discrimination that occurs under their activities and programs and this was under their activities and programs and expression the other is the here to do something about the way just for a moment accept that characterization as to the second part of it how is that violence their policy on sex misconduct it covers the same types of harms that are covered by title di and because their policy doesn't comply with the standards that are required to be applied under title nine that that is intentional discrimination we're not saying they didn't comply with title mind and that's it because that would be an adequate basis for a claim we're seeing their policy is discriminatory because it subjects so many sex based harms to different treatment compared to all other civil rights harms on campus versus titles have been argued until six title six correct their policy segregated out and equitable treatment that is mandatory under the title my regulations that they use definitions of offenses that are more onerous than the definition of a title nine offense which is on welcome i welcome and offensive and based on sex and that respond and ordered but they did do was not only inconsistent i tried my program fully inadequate and clearly deliberately and different for example they did nothing at all for months after they became aware and it was another three discrimination under every city if if i can finish up and that would include their grounds their campus their dorm rooms because the standard is whether they had required for us to match this one to her access to education not education at brown and she suffered very serious harm to access to education at providence college as a direct result of not only the  but their failure to do anything she had to quit school that's as serious as harm to education as it gets i think we're appreciative your attempt to respond  visitors protected that's not the same thing as saying that the visitor has a title mind cause of action or the requirements of gaps or and this excuse me for just a couple of things one is to follow up on the question about must there be denial of access to education after the fact is that part of her burden of proof and if that were true then everyone who is brutally assaulted on graduation day on campus would have no cause of action ever including parents and students because there would be no way to prove that that person was subsequently denied access to suffered an educational injury after the fact that's not a major dettori proof you claim you have to prove a causal connection between  action but i think this speaks about it because it addresses the nature of sexual assault as not only a form of sex discrimination but it per se severe form and that has been covered by title nine for a very long time whether a school can be held liable before the fact or