University of Texas alum crawling the Austin marathon to raise sexual assault awareness
Summer Willis hated to run. As a senior in high school in Beaumont, she quit soccer because "we were running so much, and it filled me with the most anxiety."
A year and a half ago, Willis, 30, who now lives in Houston, hit rock bottom after being diagnosed with depression and post-traumatic stress disorder following a sexual assault her sophomore year at the University of Texas.
Just three months from her 29th birthday, she decided she would run 29 marathons in a year to raise awareness about sexual assault.
Having completed those 29 marathons in a year by October, Willis is returning to the marathon circuit on Feb. 16 for the Austin Marathon.
This time, though, she'll be crawling the marathon. She'll start on the course at 8:00 the night before after being at a gala for Austin's SAFE Alliance, and crawl on her hands and knees with her husband, Andrew, staying beside her to make sure she doesn't get lost in the dark and is kept fed and hydrated.
She'll use knee pads and tape her wrists, but she knows it will be a grueling feat. She expects to reach the finish line around 1 p.m. and will be joined by friends and family, her therapist, as well as Texas legislators who are helping her spirit bills protecting victims of sexual assault.
Several bills, including Senate Bill 332 and House Bill 1714, would make it a sexual assault if the person "knows the other person is intoxicated by any substance such that the other person is incapable of appraising the nature of the act" or if the person "knows that the other person has withdrawn consent to the act and the actor persists in the act after consent is withdrawn."
Several bills, including Senate Bill 127 and House Bill 1778, would remove the statute of limitations on prosecuting sexual assault.
The idea to crawl came to Willis because recovery after a sexual assault is slow and painful, she said. "It felt like I was on hands and knees just trying to get by for years — trying to crawl back into the person that I used to be," she said.
"It's also right now a crawl to get anything done: to get legal help, to get the rape kits that you need to get, the counseling. ... It just all feels like this really slow process, but there's also strength in that. There's strength in the slow recovery."
Willis was inspired by another runner who had run 52 marathons in 52 weeks to raise money for pancreatic cancer research.
Willis had just had a baby, was sleep deprived and out of shape, she said, but she knew she could do it.
"I couldn't run a mile. I was overweight. I was depressed. but I had some running shoes, and I started training," she said.
She did three marathons in three days in Lake Tahoe that October as her first entry into the world of marathons. She later did 13 marathons in eight weeks.
Sometimes the marathons were just a mess. One time she forgot pants and had to have pants delivered to her through Uber, but the pants that arrived were almost see-through. Another time she forgot to pack deodorant. And for her first marathons, her luggage was lost, including her breast pump, which meant she could barely lift her arms while running because her breasts were so full with milk and no pump to express it.
Willis' healing was about getting stronger through running and through writing and talking about her assault, which she never reported.
"I needed to be the person that I used to believe that I could be before the rape, just someone who is strong and resilient and a fighter and someone who would do good," she said. "And so by running 29 marathons and sharing my story with the world, I guess that was me trying to be the person that I always believed I could be before."
Coming back to Austin is always difficult. When she was last here, she went by the street where her assault occurred and just cried.
She says she and a group of her sorority sisters went to a fraternity party where she was handed a drink. She believes that drink was laced with something because she has very little memory of that night. She does remember the bed and saying "no" over and over again.
Then she remembers running along the street outside the fraternity house, falling on the ground and then taking a hot shower afterward.
She later heard from people at the party what had happened to her, and she says the fraternity's underground newsletter published a narrative of that night's events, which included her rape, she said.
She didn't tell anyone what had happened to her for more than a year.
"Only 21% of people report that they were raped because it's humiliating and shameful," she said.
During one marathon, she ran through New York's Central Park with a twin mattress strapped to her back to point out that during college, women are three times more likely to be sexual assaulted during their college years than at ay other time.
The running has been therapeutic for Willis. "For a long time, for a decade, I just ran away from all the trauma, and this was my way of finally facing it head on," she said. "And then it turned into something way bigger than just myself."
When she runs, fellow survivors of sexual assault will run along side her and tell her their stories.
"At first that was really, really hard, because not only was I carrying my pain, I was carrying their pain," she said. "This is my way of turning pain into purpose and creating lasting change."
Even today, when she feels stressed or is having a bad day, she'll go for a run. It's become her way to heal.
She's created the nonprofit Strength through Strides and is working on creating a series of 5K races that will raise awareness about sexual assault and bring survivors and their loved ones together. She's also working an a film about sexual assault prevention and she is advocating for women to protect other women, especially during their college years.
It's the advice she gave her own younger sister when she arrived at UT. That means noticing when someone has had too much to drink and making sure they get home OK, or telling a someone to "get lost" if they see that person being inappropriate to another person.
She's also working on a national law to create a sexual assault victim's counselor at every college that receives federal funds.
Today, she has a lot of gratitude for her husband Andrew, who is her biggest supporter, for sons Alfred, 3, and August, 1, who love to run with her or play Pokémon Go.
"I don't even know if you ever can fully heal or recover," she said. "It is a crawl and it is an endurance race. I just want people to know that there's hope, and you can still have your happy ending. Although occasionally, I do feel sad and it was hard, I have my husband and my boys, and I'm so happy and blessed."
This article originally appeared on Austin American-Statesman: UT graduate crawling Austin Marathon to raise sexual assault awareness
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
San Francisco Chronicle
29 minutes ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation. There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill.
Hamilton Spectator
32 minutes ago
- Hamilton Spectator
A $2.8 billion settlement will change college sports forever. Here's how
A federal judge has approved terms of a sprawling $2.8 billion antitrust settlement that will upend the way college sports have been run for more than a century. In short, schools can now directly pay players through licensing deals — a concept that goes against the foundation of amateurism that college sports was built upon. Some questions and answers about this monumental change for college athletics: Q: What is the House settlement and why does it matter? A: Grant House is a former Arizona State swimmer who sued the defendants (the NCAA and the five biggest athletic conferences in the nation). His lawsuit and two others were combined and over several years the dispute wound up with the settlement that ends a decades-old prohibition on schools cutting checks directly to athletes. Now, each school will be able to make payments to athletes for use of their name, image and likeness (NIL). For reference, there are nearly 200,000 athletes and 350 schools in Division I alone and 500,000 and 1,100 schools across the entire NCAA. Q: How much will the schools pay the athletes and where will the money come from? A: In Year 1, each school can share up to about $20.5 million with their athletes, a number that represents 22% of their revenue from things like media rights, ticket sales and sponsorships. Alabama athletic director Greg Byrne famously told Congress 'those are resources and revenues that don't exist.' Some of the money will come via ever-growing TV rights packages, especially for the College Football Playoff. But some schools are increasing costs to fans through 'talent fees,' concession price hikes and 'athletic fees' added to tuition costs. Q: What about scholarships? Wasn't that like paying the athletes? A: Scholarships and 'cost of attendance' have always been part of the deal for many Division I athletes and there is certainly value to that, especially if athletes get their degree. The NCAA says its member schools hand out nearly $4 billion in athletic scholarships every year. But athletes have long argued that it was hardly enough to compensate them for the millions in revenue they helped produce for the schools, which went to a lot of places, including multimillion-dollar coaches' salaries. They took those arguments to court and won. Q: Haven't players been getting paid for a while now? A: Yes, since 2021. Facing losses in court and a growing number of state laws targeting its amateurism policies, the NCAA cleared the way for athletes to receive NIL money from third parties, including so-called donor-backed collectives that support various schools. Under House, the school can pay that money directly to athletes and the collectives are still in the game. Q: But will $20.5 million cover all the costs for the athletes? A: Probably not. But under terms of the settlement, third parties are still allowed to cut deals with the players. Some call it a workaround, but most simply view this as the new reality in college sports as schools battle to land top talent and then keep them on campus. Top quarterbacks are reportedly getting paid around $2 million a year, which would eat up about 10% of a typical school's NIL budget for all its athletes. Q: Are there any rules or is it a free-for-all? A: The defendant conferences (ACC, Big Ten, Big 12, SEC and Pac-12) are creating an enforcement arm that is essentially taking over for the NCAA, which used to police recruiting violations and the like. Among this new entity's biggest functions is to analyze third-party deals worth $600 or more to make sure they are paying players an appropriate 'market value' for the services being provided. The so-called College Sports Commission promises to be quicker and more efficient than the NCAA. Schools are being asked to sign a contract saying they will abide by the rules of this new structure, even if it means going against laws passed in their individual states. Q: What about players who played before NIL was allowed? A: A key component of the settlement is the $2.7 billion in back pay going to athletes who competed between 2016-24 and were either fully or partially shut out from those payments under previous NCAA rules. That money will come from the NCAA and its conferences (but really from the schools, who will receive lower-than-normal payouts from things like March Madness). Q: Who will get most of the money? A: Since football and men's basketball are the primary revenue drivers at most schools, and that money helps fund all the other sports, it stands to reason that the football and basketball players will get most of the money. But that is one of the most difficult calculations for the schools to make. There could be Title IX equity concerns as well. Q: What about all the swimmers, gymnasts and other Olympic sports athletes? A: The settlement calls for roster limits that will reduce the number of players on all teams while making all of those players – not just a portion – eligible for full scholarships. This figures to have an outsize impact on Olympic-sport athletes, whose scholarships cost as much as that of a football player but whose sports don't produce revenue. There are concerns that the pipeline of college talent for Team USA will take a hit. Q: So, once this is finished, all of college sports' problems are solved, right? A: The new enforcement arm seems ripe for litigation . There are also the issues of collective bargaining and whether athletes should flat-out be considered employees, a notion the NCAA and schools are generally not interested in, despite Tennessee athletic director Danny White's suggestion that collective bargaining is a potential solution to a lot of headaches. NCAA President Charlie Baker has been pushing Congress for a limited antitrust exemption that would protect college sports from another series of lawsuits but so far nothing has emerged from Capitol Hill. ___ AP college sports: Error! Sorry, there was an error processing your request. There was a problem with the recaptcha. Please try again. You may unsubscribe at any time. By signing up, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy . This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google privacy policy and terms of service apply. Want more of the latest from us? Sign up for more at our newsletter page .
New York Post
7 hours ago
- New York Post
Schools can now directly pay college athletes after landmark $2.8 billion settlement
College athletes will undergo yet another historic change. U.S. District Judge Claudia Wilken approved the $2.8 billion settlement in the House v. NCAA case on Friday, which allows schools to directly compensate student-athletes. Under the new agreement, each participating Division I school can distribute up to $20.5 million annually to athletes, with that cap increasing over the next decade. The NCAA logo at the Division I Men's Golf Championships in 2025. NCAA Photos via Getty Images Moreover, it will provide $2.8 billion in payback to former athletes dating back to 2016, addressing past restrictions on NIL, to some extent. Judge Wilken's approval in court also addressed concerns regarding roster limits that would've likely impacted walk-on athletes. The settlement introduces the 'Designated Student-Athletes' tag, which is intended to allow those impacted by roster changes to return or transfer without worrying about being penalized. NCAA President Charlie Baker discussed the settlement in a lengthy open letter. 'Many looked to April's hearing about the House settlement as a culmination of sorts, but the court's final approval of the settlement in fact marks a new beginning for Division I student-athletes and for the NCAA,' Baker wrote. 'For several years, Division I members crafted well-intentioned rules and systems to govern financial benefits from schools and name, image and likeness opportunities, but the NCAA could not easily enforce these for several reasons. 'The result was a sense of chaos: instability for schools, confusion for student-athletes and too often litigation. Sometimes member schools even supported that litigation — some of which spurred hastily imposed court orders upending the rules,' he continued. The NCAA logo is shown on signage before the Division III Men's Ice Hockey Championship held at University Nexus Center on March 30, 2025 in Utica, New York. NCAA Photos via Getty Images Baker additionally acknowledged the challenges ahead involving more change, noting: 'Going forward, the defendant conferences will be responsible for implementing several elements of the settlement, including the design and enforcement of the annual 22.5 percent cap (approximately $20.5 million in year one) for financial benefits a Division I school may direct to student-athletes,' he outlined. 'In addition, the court maintains jurisdiction over the implementation of the settlement, and the plaintiffs will continue to track progress.' Baker hailed this as positive, adding, 'The defendant conferences are also responsible for launching and enforcing a series of rules regarding the third-party NIL contracts student-athletes may enter into. With these reforms, along with scholarships and other benefits, student-athletes at many schools will be able to receive nearly 50 percent of all athletics department revenue. That is a tremendously positive change and one that was long overdue.' Baker concluded by pointing out that 'change at this scale is never easy.' Changes are set to take effect beginning on July 1.
