Douthat: Stopping Campus Rape

[Simfan34]

None of these proposals addresses the core of the problem.

That being?

That thing which half the forum claims does not exist.

The Bradley Effect?

A meaning to life beyond electoral cartography?

[Antonio the Sixth]

Rape culture.

[Simfan34]

The way to prevent burglary is to get burglars to stop burglarizing. Got it. Let us know when you have proposals beyond broad societal transformation.

If that is too glib-- and I think it might-- if we are going to have this discussion, it's time we stop acting as if any and every sort of mention of preventive measures is morally reprehensible. Once people can grasp the idea that pointing out ways for potential victims to avoid sexual assault is not assigning some kind of responsibility on them to not be assaulted or is somehow holding them at fault if they were to be assaulted, we can have a serious conversation as to how stop sexual assault in a manner beyond throwing around lefty epithets and "calling out" others for their improper ideological outlook.

[dead0man]

Rape culture.

From RAINN (US's largest anti-rape org)Quote

[Antonio the Sixth]

Rape is not burglary, and it's pretty obvious to anyone who's vaguely paying attention that attitudes on gender play a huge role in its prevalence and the quasi-total impunity that perpetrators face.

[Antonio the Sixth]

Rape culture.

From RAINN (US's largest anti-rape org)Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[Simfan34]

What exactly is "quasi-total impunity"?

I'm well aware rape is not burglary. But the approach is the same. One suggests getting the perpetrators to stop committing their crimes- a completely noble but unrealistic goal. The other suggest ways to prevent people from falling victim to the predations of would-be criminals. Why is the former reprehensible?

One of the major currents I have noticed in the "debate" here on campus and elsewhere is a call for adopting a rather narrow definition of consent-- narrow as in many casual sexual interactions prevalent in campus culture would not be considered consensual acts. Transitively, this would mean there are a lot of things going on, to put it bluntly, that could be considered rape that do not match up to the popular conception.

Now this is fine and noble, calling for fully informed consent and clearly defined boundaries, but the unmentionable thing here is that this is completely contrary to the "sex positive" culture we've come to expect from society, college culture in particularly. Indeed, I've witnessed one or two shrill "callings-out" of various writers on campus blogs or the paper for not being such. But as Douthat points out, an environment of young people drinking and partying, largely unsupervised, is going to lend itself naturally to some things that would not be considered consensual by any particularly rigorous definition of consent.

What am I trying to say- and I'm more than willing to hear otherwise- is that you cannot have it both ways. You cannot have a culture that treats sexual relations as little more than a form of recreation, one often "aided" by alcoholic consumption, and simultaneously expect participants (as they are reduced to) to always abide by concrete and inflexible rules in regards thereto.

The solution is either to accept that a society with as open a view of sexual relations as ours will inevitably produce "grey areas", or attempt to rollback sexual mores to something resembling a more constrained time. Only the former is remotely plausible, and in that case we should not go about attempting to blame "society" for an hyped "epidemic" but rather focus on preventing sexual assaults and bringing rapists to justice, an effort that loses focus when one attempts to throw in "rape culture".

[dead0man]

Rape culture.

From RAINN (US's largest anti-rape org)Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

There is plenty of scholarly literature that goes in the opposite direction as well. And besides, I don't see how anything that follows the "but" in any way contradicts the existence of underlying cultural factors.

[DC Al Fine]

What exactly is "quasi-total impunity"?

I'm well aware rape is not burglary. But the approach is the same. One suggests getting the perpetrators to stop committing their crimes- a completely noble but unrealistic goal. The other suggest ways to prevent people from falling victim to the predations of would-be criminals. Why is the former reprehensible?

Or put another way, why aren't feminists protesting in the streets when the cops tell you to lock your door at night?

[King]

I agree with the first two. I don't have a problem with coed dorms though and late night sign-ins sound inconvenient for every day life. I wouldn't try the third part unless the first two didn't make good enough progress.

[Simfan34]

What exactly is "quasi-total impunity"? What am I trying to say- and I'm more than willing to hear otherwise- is that you cannot have it both ways. You cannot have a culture that treats sexual relations as little more than a form of recreation, one often "aided" by alcoholic consumption, and simultaneously expect participants (as they are reduced to) to always abide by concrete and inflexible rules in regards thereto.

The solution is either to accept that a society with as open a view of sexual relations as ours will inevitably produce "grey areas", or attempt to rollback sexual mores to something resembling a more constrained time. Only the former is remotely plausible, and in that case we should not go about attempting to blame "society" for an hyped "epidemic" but rather focus on preventing sexual assaults and bringing rapists to justice, an effort that loses focus when one attempts to throw in "rape culture".

Douthat kind of gets at this in a piece he wrote today:

You must be logged in to read this quote.

http://mobile.nytimes.com/blogs/douthat/2014/07/08/sex-and-consequences/

[Slander and/or Libel]

Damn, this is what happens when you forget to read the liberalism handbook. You totally forget about the part advocating strangulation of craft-store patriarchs with nun entrails.

[PiMp DaDdy FitzGerald]

Do we have any data on if there is any correlation between increasing sexual liberalization and the prevalence of rape? We sort of need that either confirm or falsify many theories on rape.

[angus]

First, our lawmakers could reduce the legal drinking age to 18 from 21. The key problem in college sexual culture right now isn’t drinking per se; it’s blackout drinking, which follows from binge drinking, which is more likely to happen when a drinking culture is driven underground.

I wholeheartedly agree that the legal age to purchase alcohol is artificially high, and that lowering it would be wise.  I'd definitely vote to lower it in a binding popular referendum.

That said, I'd also vote to raise the legal driving age to about 30.  And the voting age while we're at it.  We seem to have some of that completely reversed as a society.  We'll let folks take command of dangerous machinery and decide the next generation of legislators while they're still pimply-faced adolescents more concerned with their next lay, even as we tell them they can't order a shot and a beer in a bar.  If you want to avoid drunk driving, then raise the driving age, not the drinking age.  

As for rape, I'm not as convinced.  I know that it happens, and that there are some who will commit that crime no matter what you try to do about it, but I don't know whether the drinking age has anything to do with it.  Possibly lowering it would make sense based on the article you posted, but I already support lowering it for many other good reasons.  My guess is that legalizing prostitution might decrease the frequency and intensity of rape, but I have no stats to back that up.  Your best bet is probably to teach your daughters some common sense.  Don't make them man haters, but do teach them not to go alone into certain places.  Frat parties are pretty notorious.  I agree that administrators need to take such charges seriously.  Starting quarterbacks and well-heeled legacy admits should not be exempted from the rules.

[Simfan34]

I am all for raising the voting age to as high as we see fit. Driving age should be 18. Would also kill high school parties and thus underage drinking.

[memphis]

Angus, you want to keep driving your kid around town until he's 30?

[angus]

Angus, you want to driving your kid around town until he's 30?

I'll take him to be tested once he turns 16, just like my mama did for me, but I wouldn't complain if they raised the driving age.  My wife didn't get her license till she was 29.  She was perfectly fine on buses, subways, and taxis till then.  For example, you can walk to a bus stop 500 meters from my crib, take that bus ten minutes to a train station and there board a train for an hour ride to philadelphia.  Get off and take a subway from there to the philadelphia international airport.  From there you can be anywhere on the globe within 12 hours, provided you have money, a passport, and are willing to remove your shoes and be probed, prodded, and scanned.  (Thanks Obama.)


  

[Mr. Morden]

From there you can be anywhere on the globe within 12 hours….

You severely overestimate how fast commercial jets fly.  I've been on the Dallas to Brisbane flight, which is 16 hours flying time (never mind time spent going through airport security, immigration and customs, etc.), and that's not yet halfway around the Earth.

[MaxQue]

Angus, you want to driving your kid around town until he's 30?

I'll take him to be tested once he turns 16, just like my mama did for me, but I wouldn't complain if they raised the driving age.  My wife didn't get her license till she was 29.  She was perfectly fine on buses, subways, and taxis till then.  For example, you can walk to a bus stop 500 meters from my crib, take that bus ten minutes to a train station and there board a train for an hour ride to philadelphia.  Get off and take a subway from there to the philadelphia international airport.  From there you can be anywhere on the globe within 12 hours, provided you have money, a passport, and are willing to remove your shoes and be probed, prodded, and scanned.  (Thanks Obama.)


  

But that's not possible everywhere. My 30k city has no public transportation system.

[angus]

From there you can be anywhere on the globe within 12 hours….

You severely overestimate how fast commercial jets fly.  I've been on the Dallas to Brisbane flight, which is 16 hours flying time...

Not really overestimate, but perhaps forget.  I haven't been on the Dallas to Brisbane, but I've been on the Tokyo-Minneapolis flight, and on the Shanghai-Chicago flight as well.  Both of those are about 15 hours.  12 hours, 15 hours, whatever, you get the point.  Picking the details apart in my post is rather like not seeing the forest for the trees.  My point is that I don't know much about rape, not ever having been raped or never having raped anyone, but I do know a great deal about being a 16-year-old kid with a driver's license and far, far too much to drink.  The solution to getting drunk kids from behind the wheels is easy:  the wheel is much more easily removed than the bottle. 

Getting back to the OP, I suppose that it's worth a try.  Since there are many other good reasons to lower the artificially-high age of majority, and since at least some people make halfway decent arguments regarding its benefits with respect to preventing some rapes, then why not give it a try?  Also, as simfan points out, we should focus on preventing sexual assaults and bringing rapists to justice, an effort that loses focus when one attempts to throw in "rape culture".  I'm not sure how to do all that, but I have noticed that the mention of the "rape culture" that is currently fashionable in the news magazines probably doesn't really get to the root of the problem.

[traininthedistance]

Rape culture.

From RAINN (US's largest anti-rape org)Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

[traininthedistance]

Angus, you want to keep driving your kid around town until he's 30?

Or, have towns where you can get around and live a fulfilling life without needing to drive.  You may say I'm a dreamer, but I'm not the only one.

My wife didn't get her license till she was 29.  She was perfectly fine on buses, subways, and taxis till then.  

My SO is 28 and still doesn't have her license.  Though, to be fair, she grew up in Manhattan, which is not a luxury that most folks have.  (I wish it- or something like it- was a luxury that more folks could have, of course.)

[angus]

My SO is 28 and still doesn't have her license.  Though, to be fair, she grew up in Manhattan, which is not a luxury that most folks have.  (I wish it- or something like it- was a luxury that more folks could have, of course.)

Yes, that's probably part of the equation.  My wife grew up in a city which, if it were in the United States, would be the second most populous, between NY and LA.  In her own country it isn't in the top 20.  There's a subway system there, buses, really cheap taxis, and, before the economic bubble, lots of bicycles as well. 

For me, a suburban kid from the USA, it would have been tough without a car on my 16th birthday.  But it was probably even tougher on all the cops who pulled me over during those first few years.  Bastards.  Now I realize that they were just doing their jobs.

[Lurker]

Rape culture.

From RAINN (US's largest anti-rape org)Quote

You must be logged in to read this quote.

No one hurricane or flood can be specifically, proximately pinpointed as 100 percent the result of global warming, but obviously their increased occurrence, in aggregate, can be attributed to a warmer climate and higher oceans.  It's the same here.

This is what we call "missing the forest for the trees".  Or, perhaps, a political decision to gain the support of those folks who have an allergic reaction to feminist language- a decision that perhaps makes some limited pragmatic sense, but seems strategically counterproductive to me.

[emailking]

My SO is 28 and still doesn't have her license.  Though, to be fair, she grew up in Manhattan, which is not a luxury that most folks have.  (I wish it- or something like it- was a luxury that more folks could have, of course.)

Yes, that's probably part of the equation.  My wife grew up in a city which, if it were in the United States, would be the second most populous, between NY and LA.  In her own country it isn't in the top 20.  There's a subway system there, buses, really cheap taxis, and, before the economic bubble, lots of bicycles as well. 

For me, a suburban kid from the USA, it would have been tough without a car on my 16th birthday.  But it was probably even tougher on all the cops who pulled me over during those first few years.  Bastards.  Now I realize that they were just doing their jobs.

Your argument seems to be that teenagers shouldn't be driving. Maybe that's a legitimate point, but it's a far cry from raising the driving age to 30 which seems to be overreacting a bit. Many people are a professional in the workplace at age 22, right out of college. Yet you want them to take the bus or subway to work everyday? This could add a lot of time and stress to one's day, possibly even monetary cost depending on how short the commute is. For some people that may be the best strategy given their life circusmtances, but I think most people in this situation would rather just drive to work. Restricting this for the safety to older adults seems to be of very limited value relative to the cost.

I live in a quasi urban area and there is literally no bus that could get me to my job. At best I'd still have 4 miles to walk. I could do that, by upon arrival my appearance would hadrly professional if it was raining or it was a really hot day.