I always wondered who the people were who woke up one day, saw one of these stories and said “Wow, you mean rape isn’t Ok? Who knew?” People who are violently willing to assault another human, whether the assault is sexual or not, are not reached by education and outreach. Those people need to go to jail.
Sticking with @hanna’s murder analogy, while we probably don’t need to tell people that you can’t shoot other people in the head, education does seem to help reduce the incidence of drunk driving fatalities, and the absolute safest course to follow is not to get behind the wheel if you have been drinking at all. The same appears true with sexual assault in college. No amount of education is going to stop a predator from violently raping a woman. But it is probably likely that the more you tell men that a woman may be assumed incapable of consent if she has been drinking, the more likely that incidents of ineffective consent and drunk sex in general will go down.
The darn thing is, I don’t think we feel comfortable telling the young men in our lives don’t rape. I think this crime, more than any other, comes culturally-bound with excuses. Too much focus is put on how not to get raped instead of teaching people not to rape. I like clear-cut definitions that let men see they have no justifiable reason to rape someone, and in particular being a “horny, drunk guy at an awesome college party with lots of good-looking women and more freedom than they have ever experienced so they decide to ‘get some’ no matter what” is rape. And in the case of Baylor, add “plus I’m a football player so I can do no wrong.”
@palm715, what is your clear cut definition, and how would it differ from the laws on the books now?
In my opinion two huge problems with distinguishing acceptable sexual activity from rape/sexual assault are first that pretty much everyone engages in sexual activity, and two that the line between permissible/impermissible interaction (in most places) is murky, and not necessarily dependent only on the actions of the accused. Far different situation with murder. Most people don;t regularly kill others, and if they do, generally speaking they are presumed to have done so unlawfully unless they can prove otherwise.
Is that the type of standard we should have for carnal relations?
Would be really interesting to see what those questions were that disclosed this almost but not quite rape “sexually coercive behavior”. I wonder if they published the survey questions in Violence against Women, the journal in which this study appeared?
Also interesting that the survey was taken by a total of 29 varsity athletes, 151 “recreational” athletes and 191 non athletes.
So yeah, I am going out on a limb and saying that particular survey is probably not great support for the idea that half of the college athletes in the NCAA rape their sexual partners.
Edited to add:
Here is a link to some more information on the “study”, including a table of what appears to be the questions asked.
*A point. Note that although the recitation below says that 40 percent of athletes “forced” their partner to have sex without a condom, the actual question as depicted in the attached table specifically excludes the use of force.
[quote]
Of the behaviors asked about, nearly 40 percent of the athletes admitted to forcing their partners to have sex without a condom compared to nearly 19 percent of nonathletes. Roughly 10 percent of athletes admitted to using force to get their partners to have sex while 1 percent of nonathletes did. A similar percentage of athletes admitted to using threats; zero nonathletes did the same. However, both groups were nearly as likely to insist their partners have sex with them, including oral and anal sex, when the partners didn’t want to — for both groups the number to admit this fell between 23 and 32 percent.
“Though these behaviors may not meet legal definitions of sexual assault or rape, research demonstrates that they can nonetheless have long-term negative effects,” said Desmarais. “More importantly, they represent sexual contact that was unwanted and nonconsensual, which shouldn’t be acceptable.”
Thanks for asking, @Ohiodad51. Here is my clear-cut my definition to my 18-year-old daughter, 13-year-old son and any other young person I think will listen to me: understand the laws and follow them. Specifics I think young people need to hear (and echos the more catchy DON’T RAPE list I included earlier): don’t engage in sexual activity if you or your partner are legally incapacitated, get verbal confirmation your partner wants the same things you want, and like I’ve taught my kids on all situations, don’t hurt people – no excuses. I will also add a healthy dose of I don’t care what differing opinions you have received from friends, athletes, the media, and music. What definition have you shared with your kids?
How about No means NO determining lawful sexual relations and rape given that guys need to be aware that a woman could always play the rape card even if consensual sexual interaction occurred. Ideally wait til marriage or take care of your sexual urges in a non criminal situation.
@palm715 my advice has been the same to both the son and daughter - don’t put yourself in a sexually compromising position with someone you do not trust completely. I am honestly not sure what else I can tell them, because of the myriad variables in any situation. Obviously any parent would prefer that their kids remain sexually inactive until well in their thirties, but the reality is that both my kids are of the age where you expect things to be happening or at least to happen soon. Add in the fact that they each are in multi year relationships and well, there are some things Dad probably doesn’t need to know.
I don’t disagree with anything you wrote in your definition by the way, but would point out that you have probably captured the definition of rape/sexual assault in most states and I doubt seriously that very many people would disagree with what you wrote (except the yes means yes part).
It seems though that these issues and debates always come down to things like what exactly is “legally incapacitated”, or does “hurt” imply verbal coercion. I am just not sure that there is a real ability to define every situation. I think we should acknowledge that there is a wide range of activity between physical rape and wedding night sex. Not all behavior that is not 100% female friendly is rape, and I at least object to it being characterized as such.
When it comes to any situation where drinking is to be expected and you’re contemplating potential sex partners (and I’d put frat parties and other casual college hook-ups squarely there), I think the “Tea Consent” video explains it pretty clearly. (I actually learned of it from my son when he started at college.)
“Not all behavior that is not 100% female friendly is rape, and I at least object to it being characterized as such.”
I believe everyone has a right for every sexual encounter to be “friendly” (behaving in a pleasant, kind way towards someone). What other type of sexual encounter would you expect and why? This leads to the a point I forgot, I let my kids know that not everyone they encounter has not been taught the same definition of rape. Just because the perpetrator doesn’t believe it, doesn’t mean it didn’t happen.
There is no doubt that we need to change culture and teach our boys to respect women. There is no doubt that there should be support and respect for victims and accountability for culprits. However, everyone knows theft is bad but we haven’t eradicated theft, everyone knows drinking and drugging yourself is bad but we haven’t eradicated that. Everyone knows you shouldn’t kill but thousands of murders happen every year. Everyone knows that Trump and Clinton aren’t good for the country but both have millions of supporters. We also have to tell our daughters to be proactive, not a helpless prey. Call me politically incorrect but going alone at midnight to apartments of huge drunk hormonal footballers with history of assaults, after partying , drinking and flirting is going to increase your chances of getting into trouble. It doesn’t say that a girl can’t get assaulted on campus at day time by a boyfriend but it’s less likely. You can’t assume that every parent is teaching their sons to respect women and every son is listening to their parents.
Just read Stanford swimmer’s dad’s point of view that he shouldn’t get 6 months for 20 minutes of action because this incident already changed his life. I doubt he is worried about how it changed that girl’s life.
@palm715, I submit, again, that everyone has been taught your definition of rape, just like everyone knows it is not ok to pour burning liquid down a person’s throat when they don’t want a drink. The fact that some percentage of the population will commit such acts doesn’t mean that they don’t know they were proscribed, it means they are evil.
But we should acknowledge that not all conduct you may personally disapprove of is felonious. In short hand, saying if you don’t perform oral sex I am not taking you to prom may be boorish, but it is not criminal. Telling that kid not to pour tea on somebody’s head when they are sleeping probably does little good.
Sadly on today’s college campuses it is not a dating culture it is a hook up culture so beware. I read where the greater the imbalance of a male-female ratio toward a female majority it becomes a greater haven for hook ups as girls have to keep for scarcer resources: Males. More heavily male dominated campuses are more into courting the females more in the minority.
How about - it’s just not a good idea to have sex w someone unless you are in some form of relationship - and no, meeting them an hour ago at a party doesn’t constitute a relationship. Not because I think it’s immoral to do so - it’s just unwise.
I wouldn’t hand my credit card to someone I just met at a party (but I would a boyfriend since I would know him well enough to trust him). Why would I hand my body to him?
I really think there is a great deal of tension between the idea that a woman should not be unfairly stigmatized for the sexual choices she makes and that women should feel free to do the same things and engage in the same behavior as men on the one hand with the biological reality that women are at far greater risk of assault (sexual or otherwise) when they place themselves in compromising positions.
Like it or not, much of society’s conventions about interactions between the sexes which have been removed over the last few generations operated at least in part to protect women from the types of situations we see reported frequently on college campuses. New norms need to form, and realistically I think the issue is whether the efforts by OCR, or “studies” like the one cited above, are furthering or inhibiting that effort.