Did You Learn About Rape in Grade School?

[Admiral Drason]

I seem to remember having an assembly where we were told about the dangers of date rape drugs and that rape doesn't have to be the violent kind. Other than that I really can't remember rape being taught in school at all. I think my sex ed class was woefully inadequate as we were given about 10 minutes on the use of condoms and an entire hour on how great sex is when you hold off till marriage so really I'm surprised we even got the date rape presentation.

[jramsay42]

Certainly this is not the sole resonsbility of schools. Media etc. definatey offered me the most exposure to it and imparted a negative view of it.

Sexual Education of anykind at the high school I attended in Australia was poor to say the least. The school is a Christian-based one and they practically avoid anything of this kind of topic besides to say this or that is bad occasionally. (Think South Park: "Drugs are bad"). No discussion of the use of condoms, aside from that they should be utilised.

[amigocabal]

A lot of people these days get the idea that rape is wrong from the media; Law & Order: Special Victims Unit is one of many shows that portrays rapists and kiddie diddlers as evil. Certainly by middle school, many children these days would have heard of SVU.

The Holy Bible is another form of media that has moral lessons about rape. 2 Samuel 13:1-21 is about a girl who was raped by her half-brother (who happened to be the Crown Prince of the Jews). Genesis 19:33-35 dealt with the rape of a heavily intoxicated victim. And the victim in that case was a man!

These ancient moral traditions, which we inherited, clearly teach us the wrongness of rape by persons of high social status, that sex with someone too intoxicated to participate or consent is rape, and that rape can happen to men.

[Stark]

In some cultures, rape is bad because it devalues an asset, not because it's fundamentally wrong to force someone do to something they don't want to do. Such lessons are not only worthless because they provide ample scope for 'it wasn't rape because...' rationalisations, but implicitly treat women as objects and arguably put rape on the same moral level and keying someone's car.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Genesis 19:33-35 dealt with the rape of a heavily intoxicated victim. And the victim in that case was a man!

This is a case of a religious fucknut screaming about how women are bewitching him to steal his manly seed. You know, exactly like those medieval witch-burnings. So fuck off. Moral lessons in the Old Testament, are you serious?

On-topic, we learned nothing about rape. None of the textbooks I've ever had mentioned anything. The most 'daring' thing in that aspect was, once, a sexologist (think she was) came to our school to give us a one-hour lecture, mostly about safe sex, STDs and wearing condoms. I don't know what she said to the girls.

[Terralthra]

The Holy Bible is another form of media that has moral lessons about rape. 2 Samuel 13:1-21 is about a girl who was raped by her half-brother (who happened to be the Crown Prince of the Jews). Genesis 19:33-35 dealt with the rape of a heavily intoxicated victim. And the victim in that case was a man!

These ancient moral traditions, which we inherited, clearly teach us the wrongness of rape by persons of high social status, that sex with someone too intoxicated to participate or consent is rape, and that rape can happen to men.

Except, you know, for Judges 21:10-24, Numbers 31:7-18, Deuteronomy 20:10-14, Deuteronomy 21:10-14, Judges 5:30, and Zechariah 14:1-2. Idiot.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

But... but... Terry... it's not the time for these verses!

Now that I think about it, Biblical inerrancy* is exactly that: the Bible is contradictory, and at the same time the ultimate authority, so that you are always right and you never have to express anything as personal opinion, which can be challenged and refuted. It looks really junevile when said that way, but is also the only thing I can think of.

*To preempt smartasses, I know the term refers to the Protestant doctrine.

[Zwinmar]

Knew about it early on, so not sure if it was taught in school or if parents taught it.

[Cycloneman]

Genesis 19:33-35 dealt with the rape of a heavily intoxicated victim. And the victim in that case was a man!

This is a case of a religious fucknut screaming about how women are bewitching him to steal his manly seed.

You know, this interpretation of the story of Lot being raped by his daughters is really fucked up. Yeah, it probably never happened, much like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah earlier in the chapter, but somehow that niggling little problem never seems to influence the skeptical interpretation of the destruction of the entire population of two cities as being bad and reflecting on the absence of moral character for the perpetrator. But when, a few verses later, Lot is intoxicated to the point of complete senselessness and made to have sex against his will, this is supposed to reflect poorly on Lot's moral character?

[Metahive]

You know, this interpretation of the story of Lot being raped by his daughters is really fucked up. Yeah, it probably never happened, much like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah earlier in the chapter, but somehow that niggling little problem never seems to influence the skeptical interpretation of the destruction of the entire population of two cities as being bad and reflecting on the absence of moral character for the perpetrator. But when, a few verses later, Lot is intoxicated to the point of complete senselessness and made to have sex against his will, this is supposed to reflect poorly on Lot's moral character?

Just look at it in context. The supposed offspring of this were the Moabites and the Ammonites, two tribes very hostile to the Hebrews. So this story is nothing but an attempt by Israel to denigrate its enemies ("You are a product of incestual rape and it were those damn womenfolk who came up with it!"). Then there's of course the little known fact that Lot offered his daughters up to be raped by an angry crown when he hid the two angels, who were actually in fact hostile agents to the city and so the anger of the crowd understandable. I would say Lot's moral character is indeed very questionable.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

You know, this interpretation of the story of Lot being raped by his daughters is really fucked up. Yeah, it probably never happened, much like the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah earlier in the chapter, but somehow that niggling little problem never seems to influence the skeptical interpretation of the destruction of the entire population of two cities as being bad and reflecting on the absence of moral character for the perpetrator. But when, a few verses later, Lot is intoxicated to the point of complete senselessness and made to have sex against his will, this is supposed to reflect poorly on Lot's moral character?

The destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah might have happened in some way, in the sense that something must have inspired the Hebrews who came up with that story. An incredibly awesome theory has it that a volcanic eruption somewhere in Europe kicked up a cloud of superheated gas which went in high atmosphere, passed the Mediterranean, and descended somewhere above the Levant scorching their fucking asses like... uh, like God's Wrath (TM).

Also, I never said it said anything about Lot. I mostly questioned who put that story there, and why. What kind of man would write this story about the evil lustful wimmin who will hump their own father to satisfy their evil wimmin sexlust? It strikes me as the kind of man who would also write the Malleus Maleficarum. Metahive is also saying something about it being some tribal trash talking, but to tell you the truth I can't tell who kills whom without keeping score while reading, because some parts of the fucking thing read like Golden Horde, the Prequel: Fun and Happiness with Jehovah.

[Dominus Atheos]

I doubt any of us actually learned about rape during our pre-teens. What we did learn was that forcing people to do something against their will was bad (especially bed times if you weren't tired). When we learned about sex, it was just common sense that forced sex was wrong.

[jwl]

Wow and I thought my lifeskills lessons were bad. In my lifeskills lessons, we covered sex ed for one term a year from years 6 to 10, and of course we covered rape.

Not really.

Not really relevent, but I don't like how they load the question in the survay. If they switched the genders in the top question, would they still get a simerlar response?

[DieselJester]

Wow and I thought my lifeskills lessons were bad. In my lifeskills lessons, we covered sex ed for one term a year from years 6 to 10, and of course we covered rape.

Not really.

Not really relevent, but I don't like how they load the question in the survay. If they switched the genders in the top question, would they still get a simerlar response?

Interesting thing that I just read at the website (http://www.fearus.org/#sthash.XarddO2n.dpbs)is that it seems that the original 'poll' in question there is at least two decades old and it was done on a 5 point scale as opposed to a simple 'yes/no' inquiry.

[amigocabal]

Here is a disturbing story about the Steubenville case mentioned in the first post.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... r-accounts

Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter.

The girls, ages 15 and 16, are charged with misdemeanor aggravated menacing and menacing, according to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. The Steubenville Herald Star reports the girl were also charged with felony intimidation of a witness and will remain in juvenile detention until a hearing on March 27.

Let me repeat that again.

"Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter"

If this is true, then what the fuck is wrong with these girls? How could girls engage in this kind of shit?

[AniThyng]

Here is a disturbing story about the Steubenville case mentioned in the first post.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... r-accounts

Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter.

The girls, ages 15 and 16, are charged with misdemeanor aggravated menacing and menacing, according to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. The Steubenville Herald Star reports the girl were also charged with felony intimidation of a witness and will remain in juvenile detention until a hearing on March 27.

Let me repeat that again.

"Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter"

If this is true, then what the fuck is wrong with these girls? How could girls engage in this kind of shit?

Could you elaborate on why not? Do you honestly believe that people would not be complete assholes just because they share the same gender as their victim?

[Flagg]

Here is a disturbing story about the Steubenville case mentioned in the first post.

http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2013 ... r-accounts

Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter.

The girls, ages 15 and 16, are charged with misdemeanor aggravated menacing and menacing, according to the Ohio Attorney General’s Office. The Steubenville Herald Star reports the girl were also charged with felony intimidation of a witness and will remain in juvenile detention until a hearing on March 27.

Let me repeat that again.

"Two teenage girls have been arrested on charges of threatening the victim of the Steubenville rape case on Twitter"

If this is true, then what the fuck is wrong with these girls? How could girls engage in this kind of shit?

Could you elaborate on why not? Do you honestly believe that people would not be complete assholes just because they share the same gender as their victim?

Probably the assumption that females would be more sensitive to rape victims, which is far from the case. But that's rape culture for you. This is why I think the finer points need to be taught in high school health class.

[Lagmonster]

In Ottawa, we're in the middle of a trial for three teenage girls who beat other teenage girls into submission and advertised them as prostitutes to various men. I don't think there's any such thing as gender sympathy, or that a lack thereof is a product of what sociologists are calling rape culture.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

It's plain old bullying, I think. Rape culture does figure into it, but these two are just stupid bullies.

[DieselJester]

http://www.wildcat.arizona.edu/article/ ... -ua-campus

-groan-

Every time I think that my home state (my hometown in this case) can't get any lower, someone sets the bar even lower.

[Kreller1]

We didn't hear about rape directly in school, but taking "advantage of" was addressed a little. It seems the teachers were more interested in promoting abstinence and *not* mentioning condoms at all to be able to teach anything else.