"Dont Rape" training...

[Tgace]

I'm not "against" this training per se...what the hell try it.

I'm against the mindset that this "training" is the solution to rape and that telling women to avoid binge drinking because it increases the odds of sexual assault is "victim blaming".

 

[arnisador]

Eh. No one should be stabbing me but I still practice knife defenses. Self-defense is about being prepared for bad actors.

 

[Tgace]

Eh. No one should be stabbing me but I still practice knife defenses. Self-defense is about being prepared for bad actors.

And prevention of being a victim in the first place....

Sent from my Kindle Fire using Tapatalk 2

 

[punisher733]

As usual, he's over-stating his case.

Most rape-prevention training includes such nuggets as, "most rapes are Acquaintance/Date Rape" and then offers a variety of advice to modify or mold behavior of the potential victim to not put her (him?) self in that position.

• Plan your date for a public place
• Don't have your date drive you, meet your date there
• Double-date
• Don't leave your drink unattended or with your date
• Do not drink to excess
• If you're going partying, go with a group of others you know and trust
• Make a pre-agreement with your group/double-date wing to watch your behavior and to warn you if you appear to be becoming too intoxicated or may be drugged
• &tc.

These are all classic staples of rape-prevention training and tacitly acknowledge that a potential victim's behavior and choices can either contribute to their safety or contribute to making them more vulnerable to a crime.

Mr. MacYoung is over-stating his case.

Peace favor your sword,
Kirk

It should be noted that near the beginning of the blog that MacYoung differentiates between rape PREVENTION and rape AWARENESS. You are correct that most rape prevention classes/courses do include all of those things. He is targeting the groups that only do "awareness" and focus on educating men and thinking that it will solve the problem.

I have given a couple talks to high school girls getting ready to leave for college and some of them were appalled that what they wore in public to show off their assets at the club could draw the wrong kind of attention. They seriously thought that only "hot guys" should be checking them out and would get mad if other guys were checking them out as well. I don't believe in the mindset of "she had it coming" just because of the clothes/actions she took. I had to give them another example sometimes to make it sink in. I asked them would they feel safe if they were carrying lots of money on them, and had hundred dollar bills hanging out of their pockets and clothes. They all agreed that they would want the money hidden. Hmmmmmm

I don't even know how to categorize it, but there is a belief that some people have that they can do whatever they want because "it is their right" to do so. So, they should be able to cut down a dark alley alone to save time. They should be able to walk through the group of young people on the street corner yelling/taunting passerbys, etc. etc. Then they are shocked when they are a victim of crime. I don't know how many times I have come across this in my career.

 

[chrispillertkd]

bankruptcy?

Absolutely. If people have to be informed that having sex with a woman when she is unconscious is rape there is nothing there, morally or intellectually speaking, in the first place. Both for the person in question and, perhaps, for a good portion of wider society, which help form his moral behavior in the first place. Again, that's not to mitigate the rapist's culpability, it's just to point out the fact that he, apparently, missed even the most basic moral formation (or it was eventually overcome by other influences which is, again, damning).

The training is, "Hey, if she's drunk or passed out... that's rape." It's, "This is rape. This is not rape." Because the issue is muddied in popular culture from scenes from TV Shows and Movies as recently as last week, to as far back as I can remember (Anyone remember the devil/angel scene in Animal House).

Yes, and I'm saying that if this most basic of information needs to be passed out as if it's some sort of newsflash for men of college age then there is nothing but a huge black hole in their consciences. Utter moral and intellectual bankruptcy. We could have a lively debate about why it is that we find ourselves at this juncture, I'm sure, but IMNSHO, the fact that we're having this conversation in the first place amply illustrates the dire straits we're in. We might as well inform them that picking someone's pocket is theft if they need that kind of remedial moral formation.

Pax,

Chris

 

[jks919978]

I don't think most men need to be told that rape is wrong. And the ones who do won't get the message from a speech or presentation. For the handful that need some sort of clarification that if she's drunk, she can't consent -- but, honestly, many aren't going to get the message that way, either.

Rape is about the only crime where it's taboo to admit that the victim's actions contribute to the potential of it occurring. Leaving your house or car unlocked isn't an excuse for the criminal to steal stuff from it -- but we recognize that doing so makes you vulnerable to larceny. Walk through Anacostia in a coat of $100 bills, and people will be surprised if you're not robbed. But if you point out that getting wasted around a bunch of college guys who aren't known for judgement or impulse control makes you more vulnerable to being raped, or that wearing clothes that leave nothing to the imagination is likely to attract undesired attention, and suddenly we're blaming the victim. If I was called to do a home security survey, and I walked around and noted that there were a lot of valuables on display from the windows, and that the locks are substandard and ineffective, especially since the homeowner leaves the door unlocked most of the time, and provide some advice on hardening the target and reducing the visibility of those valuables -- I'm providing good advice. Make comparable advice to women about avoiding rape, and it's blaming the victim. And often, discouraged from even pointing that out because it might trigger memories in victims in the audience.

 

[Steve]

Absolutely. If people have to be informed that having sex with a woman when she is unconscious is rape there is nothing there, morally or intellectually speaking, in the first place. Both for the person in question and, perhaps, for a good portion of wider society, which help form his moral behavior in the first place. Again, that's not to mitigate the rapist's culpability, it's just to point out the fact that he, apparently, missed even the most basic moral formation (or it was eventually overcome by other influences which is, again, damning).



Yes, and I'm saying that if this most basic of information needs to be passed out as if it's some sort of newsflash for men of college age then there is nothing but a huge black hole in their consciences. Utter moral and intellectual bankruptcy. We could have a lively debate about why it is that we find ourselves at this juncture, I'm sure, but IMNSHO, the fact that we're having this conversation in the first place amply illustrates the dire straits we're in. We might as well inform them that picking someone's pocket is theft if they need that kind of remedial moral formation.

Pax,

Chris

Okay. I'm just going to cut and paste what I've already said, because it really seems like you're missing it:

To Tgace:
"No disagreement from me here, tgace. What we're really talking about is changing culture and it won't happen in a 2 hour (or whatever) training class. Training a guy on this isn't going to do any more good than teaching a woman anti-rape "self defense" at a 2 hour seminar.

But, there is a place for an institution formally saying, "This is okay. This is not okay." It can help with accountability and is one step out of many needed to change the culture around a particular subject."

And in direct response to you:
"I don't think we're disagreeing here. There IS a larger problem. As I said to Tgace, the training will likely not change many individuals behavior, but the training will help in other ways. At the very least, the training sets a clear expectation. What we're both saying, I think, is that what is needed is a fundamental shift in culture. Starting there, setting clear expectations, such as through training or whatever, will help hold people accountable."

I genuinely don't understand what you're disagreeing with here. You are saying pretty much the exact same thing, just using stronger and more judgmental language. If you're acknowledging that we have a culture that sends mixed messages to kids regarding rape, condemning and simultaneously excusing it, which has brought us to a point where we need to do something about it, I agree. Call it moral bankruptcy, rape culture or whatever language you choose.

 

[Steve]

I don't think most men need to be told that rape is wrong. And the ones who do won't get the message from a speech or presentation. For the handful that need some sort of clarification that if she's drunk, she can't consent -- but, honestly, many aren't going to get the message that way, either.

I agree. It's the cognitive dissonance at work, similar to kids who steal movies or music off of Usenet or a torrents site. Most know that stealing is illegal and would never steal from a store. The issue isn't whether or not they understand that stealing is wrong. They just don't see downloading music from a website as stealing. It's a disconnect that has resulted because society at large has sent mixed signals. Same thing in a frat house. The culture of the Greek System is, in my experience, broken and dysfunctional, where excessive drinking as a means of "getting laid" is presented as something other than rape. The culture of the group creates a disconnect where the behavior is excused and understood to be something other than the behavior that is considered immoral.

 

[chrispillertkd]

I genuinely don't understand what you're disagreeing with here. You are saying pretty much the exact same thing, just using stronger and more judgmental language. If you're acknowledging that we have a culture that sends mixed messages to kids regarding rape, condemning and simultaneously excusing it, which has brought us to a point where we need to do something about it, I agree. Call it moral bankruptcy, rape culture or whatever language you choose.

I was disagreeing with two things. First, your seeming disagreement that such a requirement for "training" men not to rape unconscious women would be an indication of moral bankruptcy (when you said: "bankruptcy? I don't know about that."). If such education is, in fact, a necessity then yes it's a sign of moral bankruptcy. Secondly, I would very much disagree with the idea that such a "training" would have any substantive effect in the first place, for the reasons I stated above. If it is the case that a person's parents haven't inculcated a moral sense in them that would prohibit such behavior in the first place, nor their church, for that matter, and that the other societal influences that you cited have formed them in such a manner as to see that behavior as acceptable then I see little hope that having some remedial training would make any positive impact. Yes, we need a "fundamental shift in culture." But I see no such movement on the horizon, and little if any interest in actualizing such a development.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Steve]

I was disagreeing with two things. First, your seeming disagreement that such a requirement for "training" men not to rape unconscious women would be an indication of moral bankruptcy (when you said: "bankruptcy? I don't know about that."). If such education is, in fact, a necessity then yes it's a sign of moral bankruptcy.

Okay. Thanks. This makes some sense now. I think we're arguing over a matter of degrees here. I agree with you to a point. I just think you're overstating things.

Secondly, I would very much disagree with the idea that such a "training" would have any substantive effect in the first place, for the reasons I stated above. If it is the case that a person's parents haven't inculcated a moral sense in them that would prohibit such behavior in the first place, nor their church, for that matter, and that the other societal influences that you cited have formed them in such a manner as to see that behavior as acceptable then I see little hope that having some remedial training would make any positive impact. Yes, we need a "fundamental shift in culture." But I see no such movement on the horizon, and little if any interest in actualizing such a development.

This is where I get really confused. Where have I said that this kind of training would have any substantive effect? In fact, I'm pretty sure I have said that it will likely not have any noticeable affect.

If we disagree at all, it's that you seem to be saying that all hope is lost, and I think that's why I wonder at the use of more absolute language like "bankrupt." I don't believe that to be true. We've seen pervasive changes in the way that society deals with many different issues. For example, when I was a kid, it was unheard of to wear a seat belt. Now, most people I know put one on out of habit and would never consider allowing a child to ride unbelted. Drinking and driving is a huge one. Twenty or 30 years ago, it was common for someone to hit the happy hour on the way home from work, and if pulled over, the cop would call him a cab or let him go with a warning.

There's no reason to believe that we can't create a necessary shift in our culture. We've seen it in many areas of our lives, from interracial and gay marriage to drinking and driving to workplace harassment and discrimination and many, many other examples.

 

[jks919978]

I agree. It's the cognitive dissonance at work, similar to kids who steal movies or music off of Usenet or a torrents site. Most know that stealing is illegal and would never steal from a store. The issue isn't whether or not they understand that stealing is wrong. They just don't see downloading music from a website as stealing. It's a disconnect that has resulted because society at large has sent mixed signals. Same thing in a frat house. The culture of the Greek System is, in my experience, broken and dysfunctional, where excessive drinking as a means of "getting laid" is presented as something other than rape. The culture of the group creates a disconnect where the behavior is excused and understood to be something other than the behavior that is considered immoral.

That's a different issue, I think. I agree with you that putting the standards out in a clear and distinct manner is a good thing; it's easy to hold people to a standard, if it's published. If it's just assumed that they know -- there's every chance they don't. I can't say what the college Greek culture is like; I was never a part of it. I think that anyone presenting a mindset that tolerates "if I get her drunk enough, I'll get 'lucky'" is already starting from a bad base. I honestly think that a lot of the people who make a statement like that are already wrong, and you're only going to put a written rule in their face; they'll find a way to justify it. It might be the outcome of decades of moral relativism...

 

[chrispillertkd]

If we disagree at all, it's that you seem to be saying that all hope is lost, and I think that's why I wonder at the use of more absolute language like "bankrupt." I don't believe that to be true.

I wouldn't say all hope is lost. But I am certainly not an optimist about putting the breaks on things and reversing course.

There's no reason to believe that we can't create a necessary shift in our culture. We've seen it in many areas of our lives, from interracial and gay marriage to drinking and driving to workplace harassment and discrimination and many, many other examples.

Sure we've seen changes in behavior over time, but I seriously doubt people have the interest or wherewithal to change this one. I could certainly be wrong.

FWIW, I don't see your example of interracial marriage as really applying since it was a temporary and localized aberration from pretty much the entire Common Law tradition. In India, for example, it was estimated that upwards of a third of English men had married an Indian wife. The interracial marriage ban was, in effect, an invention of American slave owners. I don't know that rape falls into that same category (localized and temporary).

You seem to be saying that we can somehow educate people into moral goodness. You can certainly educate them as to what the good is. But I don't think that knowledge is itself going to make them choose it. Hasn't worked with theft, murder, lying, etc.

Pax,

Chris

 

[Steve]

I wouldn't say all hope is lost. But I am certainly not an optimist about putting the breaks on things and reversing course.



Sure we've seen changes in behavior over time, but I seriously doubt people have the interest or wherewithal to change this one. I could certainly be wrong.

FWIW, I don't see your example of interracial marriage as really applying since it was a temporary and localized aberration from pretty much the entire Common Law tradition. In India, for example, it was estimated that upwards of a third of English men had married an Indian wife. The interracial marriage ban was, in effect, an invention of American slave owners. I don't know that rape falls into that same category (localized and temporary).

You seem to be saying that we can somehow educate people into moral goodness. You can certainly educate them as to what the good is. But I don't think that knowledge is itself going to make them choose it. Hasn't worked with theft, murder, lying, etc.

Pax,

Chris

Aren't we talking about America? What would the history of marriage in India have to do with the topic at hand? Of course I'm speaking to the history of interracial marriage in the USA.

Regarding the teaching of morality, yes, I think its taught. There are two sides to it, though. While we have an obligation to teach it, there is also a obligation of the individual to learn and apply the teachings. Some won't.

While society has largely moved toward ostracizing those who drive intoxicated, some still do so. While America has largely accepted interracial marriage as normal, there are still some who believe it to be unacceptable.

Regarding rape, how it's understood and accepted does depend upon the culture in which one is raised.

Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

 

[shesulsa]

Sorry to necro-post ... a little. I tried to stomach my way through this thread - all posts of which have been made by men, the statistically larger group that rapes people - and I just can't help but sigh.

There's a lot of (frankly) useless discussion here. Marc McYoung's repeated barking about victim-blaming and cry-bullies has always left me dry and on guard.

Generally, people of all walks of life can be cavalier about their surroundings, their associations, their practices, their lifestyles, yet the three top sectors of the population to be victims of violent crimes such as rape are all females and 3 out of 4 rapes are committed by someone known by the victim.

We're not stupid here. Self-defense is necessary because of bad people who act badly. Risk reduction is necessary BECAUSE of those bad actors.

The apologetics touted by bloggers who make money off of controversial positions are hardly viable and a flaccid (though desirous of a more purchased) attempt at offloading the responsibility of men to start calling out men for bad behavior, for acting in the greater good. I seriously think McYoung couldn't support the victimhood of women if someone PAID him to.

It's simple, really - tell me what elderly women in loaded diapers and infants who can't walk can do to reduce their victim ratio? Or are mumus and bibs just that sexy?

Rape is not about sex - it is about control - dominance - power-over. Sex is the weapon.

Get a grip, fellas ... literally.

 

[JowGaWolf]

I don't believe in the mindset of "she had it coming" just because of the clothes/actions she took.

The reality is that sometimes how we dress and act does create a "had it coming to you" reality.

They way that I tip toe around this is to focus on the Types of Attention we attract and not the criminal acts that are done.

The truth of the matter is that Women already understand that the way they dress may attract some negative and even dangerous people. They understand that because if you ask women if they think a little girls should wear the same revealing clothing many of them would give the same answers and reasons that men like to give. I think they are probably more fed up with a man telling them that, when they probably know better than men, how what they wear affect men.

I think self-defense for women should focus on. "If a pearson wants to wear a clothing that may increase safety risk..."
1. What is the best way to protect yourself while in that clothing
2. What are some of the things that I should look for
3. How do I decide that the risk out way the benefits.

The reality is that we could wear a sports jersey in the wrong place and be in more danger than a woman dressed nicely. I look at my own self-defense efforts as "Risk Management" and not "Prevention." The only thing I truly want to prevent, is to prevent a bad situation from becoming the worst situation.

 

[Steve]

Sorry to necro-post ... a little. I tried to stomach my way through this thread - all posts of which have been made by men, the statistically larger group that rapes people - and I just can't help but sigh.

There's a lot of (frankly) useless discussion here. Marc McYoung's repeated barking about victim-blaming and cry-bullies has always left me dry and on guard.

Generally, people of all walks of life can be cavalier about their surroundings, their associations, their practices, their lifestyles, yet the three top sectors of the population to be victims of violent crimes such as rape are all females and 3 out of 4 rapes are committed by someone known by the victim.

We're not stupid here. Self-defense is necessary because of bad people who act badly. Risk reduction is necessary BECAUSE of those bad actors.

The apologetics touted by bloggers who make money off of controversial positions are hardly viable and a flaccid (though desirous of a more purchased) attempt at offloading the responsibility of men to start calling out men for bad behavior, for acting in the greater good. I seriously think McYoung couldn't support the victimhood of women if someone PAID him to.

It's simple, really - tell me what elderly women in loaded diapers and infants who can't walk can do to reduce their victim ratio? Or are mumus and bibs just that sexy?

Rape is not about sex - it is about control - dominance - power-over. Sex is the weapon.

Get a grip, fellas ... literally.

I’ve learned a lot over the years. Wish I’d been a little less worried about getting along and more direct in my posts. It’s interesting how much has changed since 2013 and sad how much has not.

 

[lklawson]

Sorry to necro-post ... a little. I tried to stomach my way through this thread - all posts of which have been made by men, the statistically larger group that rapes people - and I just can't help but sigh.

So you're upset that men are discussing a crime that other men are statistically more likely to commit than women? Should men therefore not discuss bank robbery, murder, or muggings because those are crimes typically committed by other men? If men are barred from discussing prevention, defense, and mitigation strategies for crimes statistically more often committed by men, what crimes can men comment on?

There's a lot of (frankly) useless discussion here.

Umm... You're not new to the forum. Why should this thread be any different?

Marc McYoung's repeated barking about victim-blaming and cry-bullies has always left me dry and on guard.

He often has that affect on people, regardless of gender.

Generally, people of all walks of life can be cavalier about their surroundings, their associations, their practices, their lifestyles, yet the three top sectors of the population to be victims of violent crimes such as rape are all females and 3 out of 4 rapes are committed by someone known by the victim.

And? Where are you going with this?

We're not stupid here. Self-defense is necessary because of bad people who act badly. Risk reduction is necessary BECAUSE of those bad actors.

I re-read the thread and I don't think anyone disagrees with that.

The apologetics touted by bloggers who make money off of controversial positions are hardly viable and a flaccid (though desirous of a more purchased) attempt at offloading the responsibility of men to start calling out men for bad behavior, for acting in the greater good. I seriously think McYoung couldn't support the victimhood of women if someone PAID him to.

Could you go over that again? Because it sounds a little bit like you're saying that all men bear a responsibility for some other person's behavior and choices. If all men do not instantly decry every instance of "bad behavior" they're somehow "offloading responsibility?" What else does this apply to? If one man tells a lie are all men required to immediately denounce or bear responsibility for another's lie? Does this rule apply only to men or are women also on the hook for other women's misdeeds? If one woman lies, steals money, or assaults another person, are all women required be immediately denounce the action or share in the responsibility of the misdeed?

Maybe I missed your actual position because none of that sounds reasonable at all.

It's simple, really - tell me what elderly women in loaded diapers and infants who can't walk can do to reduce their victim ratio? Or are mumus and bibs just that sexy?

Elderly women? Well, that was, in fact discussed in the thread. But you admitted that you didn't actually read the thread so you probably missed it. It involves various mitigation strategies and I particularly mentioned weapons several times.

Rape is not about sex

Except for when it is.

Peace favor you sword,
Kirk

 

[shesulsa]

So you're upset that men are discussing a crime that other men are statistically more likely to commit than women? Should men therefore not discuss bank robbery, murder, or muggings because those are crimes typically committed by other men? If men are barred from discussing prevention, defense, and mitigation strategies for crimes statistically more often committed by men, what crimes can men comment on?

Aren't you cute. Did I say I was upset THAT men were discussing this matter? No. I did not.

And? Where are you going with this?

That most of the discussion had tends to slant towards the assumption that a woman is out-and-about engaging in risky behavior wearing clothing that men think invites them or is meant to attract their attention when the truth is the majority of women who are raped are wearing things like pajamas, mumus, casual clothing doing nothing but going about their daily business.

Could you go over that again? Because it sounds a little bit like you're saying that all men bear a responsibility for some other person's behavior and choices. If all men do not instantly decry every instance of "bad behavior" they're somehow "offloading responsibility?" What else does this apply to? If one man tells a lie are all men required to immediately denounce or bear responsibility for another's lie? Does this rule apply only to men or are women also on the hook for other women's misdeeds? If one woman lies, steals money, or assaults another person, are all women required be immediately denounce the action or share in the responsibility of the misdeed?

Maybe I missed your actual position because none of that sounds reasonable at all.

Reach much?

Ironically, most women have been sexually assaulted yet few men claim to know any man who has assaulted someone. Some of the discussion in this thread intimates the responsibility of sexual assault on female victims based on what they wear and where they go and what they do - NOT ON THE ACTIONS OF BAD ACTORS. To respond to your strawman fallacy, yes - women DO call out other women on bad actions ... theft, robbery, spousal abuse, paternal manipulation, etcetera. Most men miss it because they infantilize this type of social responsibility taken on mostly by women as bickering or cat-fighting, transform it into something sexually arousing, and reassign its meaning to suit their desires instead of recognizing the usefulness. So it would be GREAT if MEN could say - "hey, just because a woman dresses up and puts makeup on doesn't mean she's trying to attract someone. Shut that **** down." It is a GENERAL, SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY - just as many martial artists purport to possess, that of protecting themselves, their loved ones, and someone in genuine need if logically feasible and sensible.

Elderly women? Well, that was, in fact discussed in the thread. But you admitted that you didn't actually read the thread so you probably missed it. It involves various mitigation strategies and I particularly mentioned weapons several times.

I'll grab some tums and circle back for your recommendation, but the last I checked when visiting elderly relatives, weapons weren't allowed to be possessed by the nursing home residents.

Except for when it is.

Virtually EVERY expert on rape completely disagrees with this. When do YOU think it's about sex?

 

[drop bear107]

So it would be GREAT if MEN could say - "hey, just because a woman dresses up and puts makeup on doesn't mean she's trying to attract someone. Shut that **** down." It is a GENERAL, SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITY - just as many martial artists purport to possess, that of protecting themselves, their loved ones, and someone in genuine need if logically feasible and sensible.

Yeah. The clothing thing was unexpected for me. I would have thought it was more about actions that place women in a vulnerable position with people they don't know. Rather than just dressing how they want.

Yes men should not rape women. But women' don't go for those free drinks back at the biker club either.

(Sorry unless you are holidaying in some weird backwards country that has legitimate issues with that kind of thing. Like Afghanistan or Texas)

 

[drop bear107]

Virtually EVERY expert on rape completely disagrees with this. When do YOU think it's about sex?

And here is a controversial idea that tacks on to this idea.

Guys bash other guys for pretty much the same reason that guys rape girls. And this means men are the same victims from the same people for the same reasons.

And then we get in to a big argument as to whether getting your head kicked in or raped is the greater crime.