<p>kristin: My son attended the assembly when he was 15–he will be 21 in a few days. He was not scarred for life by the assembly; he simply came home that day a bit shook up (for a boy to share something like this with a mom means he’s upset, in my experience) and told me that he found it demeaning. He was, as are most boys, I believe, raised to treat women (in fact, all human beings) with kindness and respect. It is beyond my comprehension that I, or anyone else, would have to teach him the various gray areas of the legal definitions of rape. That’s just the way it is, and I feel saddened that so many of you think so little of our teenage boys that you think they have to taught not to take advantage of a female in any way. In terms of schools teaching “the values” to kids, it’s simple: teach them to respect themselves and respect others. In that manner we can fire all the “health” teachers and save the taxpayers a lot of money.</p>
<p>Perhaps posters are confusing “potential” with “predisposition.”</p>
<p>Anyone who gets behind the wheel is a potential drunk drive - - thus the mandatory anti-alcohol class. But that doesn’t mean that any of the attendees in predisposed or particularly at-risk to drink and drive (very diff than the required class after a DWI offense).</p>
<p>So too the date rape assembly or other diversiy prgms. Any one of us has the potential to offend, but attending the program doesn’t meant you are viewed as predisposed or particularly at-risk to engange in offensive conduct. </p>
<p>I can’t say I agree w/ the sanctimonious tone of some programs, but until there’s something better . . . .</p>
<p>“I can’t say I agree w/ the sanctimonious tone of some programs”</p>
<p>Yeah, in my limited experience, this is especially a problem with DARE and similar anti-drug programs. I wasn’t surprised when research came out saying that they weren’t effective–I’ve known DARE INSTRUCTORS who smoked pot. I don’t know how to reduce the number of kids who do drugs, but the anti-drug educators don’t, either.</p>
<p>On the other hand, my high school had a very strong anti-drunk-driving program, including a program to get parents to promise in advance to give the kids rides home from anywhere, no questions asked, if the alternative was to drive or ride with an impaired driver. The program was extremely effective, and drunk driving just didn’t happen, even though kids at my school did plenty of drinking and raised every other kind of rich-kid hell. I don’t know what made that system work so well, but if we could figure it out, we might make the other programs less of a waste of time.</p>
<p>“I don’t know how to reduce the number of kids who do drugs, but the anti-drug educators don’t, either.”</p>
<p>Actually, we know an ENORMOUS amount about how to do so - with demonstrable evidence-based results - but we don’t implement it. (DARE has been shown pretty conclusively and repeatedly NOT to work, but there are political reasons why some localities continue to use it.)</p>
<p>What works?</p>
<p>I pretty much gave up on this question when a drug-using acquaintance in college told me how much the movie “Trainspotting” made her want to try heroin. If you haven’t seen the movie, it has a lot of horrifying, unedited scenes of the consequences of heroin addiction, from uncontrollable body waste to the corpse of an infant who died of thirst while her parents were high. I figured that anyone who saw it would have the same reaction I did, which was: EEEEWWWW NEVER NEVER NEVER. But this woman saw it and thought, “Wow, if those horrible outcomes don’t make them stop using, heroin must be really really awesome!”</p>
<p>And I thought, wow, I REALLY don’t understand how to get interested people not to use.</p>
<p>The Social Development Research Group at the University of Washington has spent the last 20 years putting together data on “risk and protective” factors for youth alcohol and drug use, in four domains - community, family, school, and individual/peer. The simple way of saying it is by lowering risk factors and enhancing protective factors, youth adolescent drug use can be lowered. There are more than 300 evidence-based programs that have been scientifically proven to lower the rate of adolescent drug use.</p>
<p>In school-based programs alone, 11 programs implemented in Washington State (none of them are DARE) in SFY 2006 provided a total cost-benefit to the taxpayers of $20,627,000.</p>
<p>You can find my own work on the subject at <a href=“http://www.dshs.wa.gov/dasa/[/url]”>www.dshs.wa.gov/dasa/</a> (look for the 2006 Trends report, section on Prevention.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do you have to “get” anyone to do/not do anything? Perhaps they could be treated with dignity as autonomous human beings who are free to make their own choices–good or bad, and live with the consequences.</p>
<p>I always knew drugs were not good for me, even though I never heard one single anti-drug lecture. I always knew that drinking too much could lead to alcoholism. I knew that I should have foods from all the food groups each day. I knew I should get exercise, fresh air and keep myself clean. I knew I should see a dentist twice a year. I knew that promiscuous sex was probably not good for me mentally, emotionally or physically. I knew that babies could be made if one didn’t use birth control. I knew what rape was in all its shades of gray by sixth grade. I knew that driving while drunk could cause accidents. I could go on. How did I learn all this since no one told me? I just did. I guess I was just one amazing human being (me and all the rest of my generation and generations before me who went to school before the state decided that schools had to take over in areas which were previously left to parents and/or common sense).</p>
<p>We, as a society (and individually) have an interest in encouraging good and discouraging bad behavior b/c we all suffer the consequences - - not just just the autonomous individuals who engage in the conduct at issue. Lord knows drunks certainly aren’t the only victims of DWI, and unwed teen moms aren’t the only ones paying for their youthful indiscretions.</p>
<p>Even though you know that drugs, drunk driving and rape are bad, the incidents of such conduct clearly demonstrate that other folks haven’t yet figured out yet. Since that group isn’t easily identifiable, there is some preaching to the choir - - but so what. I agree, hearing the same old song can be annoying, but doesn’t really harm you. And isn’t any minimal discomfort among the converts a small price to pay to get the message to the uninitiated?</p>
<p>As for the colleges, they are allowed to hold their student body to a higher standard than that which is expected of the general public (or another school); the honor code being one example of that higher standard, requiring a certain level of civility (ie: no racist/sexist/homophobic/etc. parties or pranks) is just another example. </p>
<p>An autonomous indiv who doesn’t like Mac’s mores, is free to chose a diff school.</p>
<p>My question is: Where do the kids who don’t grow up in healthy home situations receive this vitally important information? Are they just out of luck? What about the rest of us who might might be harmed from actions they carry out due to their ignorance?</p>
<p>“it’s insulting to think that someone might think i’d be in a situation with a potential criminal.”</p>
<p>Well, think of it this way, YOU may not think you will ever be in that position, but so did most date rape victims</p>
<p>And if not, maybe one of your friends…its all about being aware</p>
<p>Most guys are good guys, as are most girls, and it is often that pressure of doing the right thing and not wanting to disappoint friends that keeps people doing right</p>
<p>So what if a kid has to sit through a meeting that doesn’t DIRECTLY effect them, it can effect someone they know…maybe a female friend</p>
<p>So I don’t get the anger about the programs</p>
<p>My Ds have had friends and classmates that had “issues and events” and having been through the programs helped them help others</p>
<p>Yeah, yeah, I know. The only problem is that your method is, and has not been, working. The kids are sick to death of it (all but the most indoctrinated and brainwashed, that is).</p>
<p>You’d be amazed what common sense and intelligence kids from “unhealthy” home situations can exhibit when they’re treated that way!</p>
<p>This stuff is getting out of hand with all these colleges and kramer and all. It’s all out in the open. (and some people even believe it to be ok)
the US is reverting back to how it used to be.
It wont be long till we start to witness lynchings again. (there will be people claiming lynchings to be okay)</p>
<p>These people will always have their excuses: “we’re only making a satire” “we’re trying to be un-pc” “we were having sadistic fun”</p>
<p>not surprised about the increasing rate of nazi members e.t.c</p>
<p>Rape, including date rape, is as common in the “healthy” classes as it is the “unhealthy.” The idea that kids who come from “proper” homes aren’t at risk for committing date rape is, in and of itself, such a myth that it points up the need for more date rape awareness training, rather than less.</p>
<p>wow, what can I say, only kids from “unhealthy” families drink, have sex, get raped, date rape, are bigots…</p>
<p>just that comment from HH alone scares me</p>
<p>Is it indoctrination to teach safe sex, or to not judge people by the color of their skin, or their gender…</p>
<p>Is it bad to try and educate people, guess it is to some</p>
<p>and after reading some of the posts here, some haven’t figured out that words, actions hurt others, but they just don’t seem to care about that…and I can bet you the people that have the hardest time with this kind of awareness training are the ones that need it the most</p>
<p>I was responding to poetheart’s point about kids not raised in “healthy” families, which is the only reason I used the word unhealthy (and why I put it in quotes). No need to be afraid!</p>
<p>Have you ever pondered that millions of humans have survived and will survive without your help, cgm? It’s a wonder, isn’t it?</p>
<p>The idea that boys from homes with “good” parents don’t need date rape education is really a step backward. How many times have rape victims been accused of lying because a boy from a “good” home wouldn’t do a thing like that? Or a handsome boy, a popular boy, a rich boy, etc.? There is already so much stigma attached to being raped, and so much hostility to rape victims when the accused is popular or likeable. I don’t see how doing away with date rape education is going to do anything but go back to the days when women were afraid to speak out because the rest of their lives would be ruined.</p>
<p>Are there more or fewer date rapes than there were in the years before “date rape education?” Do you even have any idea? Or will you just say that it’s been unreported in years past? How many boys are potential/current rapists? Any idea? So we “educate” the entire teenage population of boys in this country to prevent how many rapes? Do you have some statistics on how this education has helped?</p>
<p>It used to be that there were two kinds of men: gentleman and non-gentlemen. However, since then feminists have determined that all men are brutes, so the concept no longer holds. Sad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The objection to date rape education is really about hostility toward feminism and gender equality. I’m glad that’s out on the table now.</p>
<p>I don’t know if date rape is more common or less common than it used to be, because as you point out, before awareness levels were raised, victims were so unlikely to get justice and protection there was little point to making a report. Indeed, the victim often got so much backlash from the community, she had to leave town. </p>
<p>Less than 50 miles from here a college freshman committed suicide after confiding to friends she had been drugged and gang raped at a fraternity party. The university had a history of sweeping accusations under the rug about this fraternity, even refusing to notify victims of their rights as required by federal law, and failing to include them in the Clery Act notifications. In the face of mounting accusations, the university undid previous punishments to the fraternity, on the excuse that since the men were still having parties, etc., despite being forbidden, the “no parties” rule “wasn’t working”. Last I heard, the federal government was still investigating the violations of federal law and the university has already had to pay out a settlement to the employee they fired after she raised concerns about this.</p>
<p>Date rape awareness not only seeks to prevent rape but also to help people understand the realities of rape and to see past some of the stereotypes that have been bandied about in this thread (for example, that date rape is irrelevent to boys from good homes).</p>
<p>In addition, as I said earlier, date rape awareness protects boys too. The laws about rape are not always intuitive. In some cases, whether a woman has been raped depends on what state she lives in. For example, some states recognize that a woman has right to withdraw consent once intercourse has begun, other states do not.</p>
<p>Right now there’s a young man in Georgia sentenced to 10 years for an act that was initiated by the girl, a girl who at 15 was only two years younger than he was. In Louisiana, a 17 year old wouldn’t even have been charged for that, because of the closeness of the kid’s ages. I’m sure his mother wishes everyday he had known and understood the legal consequences of his actions. How does suppressing this kind of information help boys? </p>
<p>There is no benefit to men or women from withholding date rape awareness education from the public.</p>
<p>I was reading about the “withdraw” of consent</p>
<p>Can you imagine that some people think that there should be a time lag, like 5 minute or whatever for a man to “stop” once a woman says to STOP…that men can’t control themselves enough to cease and desist</p>
<p>What does that say about men…Me, I think men have enough control to stop when a woman says stop…but others, who want to protect men say that well that males just can’t control themselves</p>
<p>Hmmm, who thinks all men are brutes now</p>
<p>Who thinks all men are brutes?</p>
<p>Probably the same people who think that women who dress provocatively are to blame when they get raped. They don’t seem to understand the difference between rape, which is a crime of violence, and ordinary sexual arousal. Rapists rape because it’s what they do. If women stop doing whatever it is that the apologists think incites rapists, rapists will just find some other thing to be incited by.</p>