Conference turris::womannotes-v3

995.0. "What are we teaching our kids?" by RIPPLE::KENNEDY_KA (One Day at a Time) Fri Aug 23 1991 17:37

    
    I am entering this article as FYI.  
    This article is copied from the Seattle Post-Intelligencer without
    permission.
    
    
         WHAT TEENAGERS DON'T KNOW ABOUT RAPE IS APPALLING
                        by Linda Ellerbee
    
    I would like to say a word in favor of education, which, if I remember
    correctly, my teachers told me was a good thing.  Easy for them to say. 
    Back then teachers didn't have to wallow in the moral, religious and
    legal mud of sex education.  They didn't have to teach a subject in
    which they might be required to make sure our knowledge never exceeded
    their ignorance.
    
    Thank goodness that today we live in an enlightened America, where sex
    education is taught in all 50 states.
    
    Why, in 32 states, teachers are even allowed to mention the possibility
    that pregnancy may be prevented.  Can you imagine?
    
    Now forget for a moment the issue of birth control because despite what
    some would have you believe, it's not the only subject of or reason for
    sex education.  Consider what we're not teaching our kids about rape.
    
    The William Kennedy Smith case has made rape a hot topic this summer. 
    His trial next January will keep it warmed up.  So far, the issues that
    have received the most public attention have been whether the new media
    should reveal the name of the alleged victim and whether the
    defendant's rights will be abridged if the trial is televised. 
    Complicated issues, both of them.
    
    There's another, much simpler issue.
    
    Ask teenagers if they think rape is bad and most will say, "Of course
    it is."  But what happens when you rephrase the question?
    
    The Rhode Island Rape Crisis Center interviewed 1,700 students in the
    6th to 9th grade concerning their knowledge and attitudes about a
    variety of sexual situations.  The students came from private and
    public schools.  The students answered the questions individually and
    anonymously. 
    
    Their answers were shocking.
    
    To begin with, most students believed sexual assault crimes were
    usually committed by strangers.  The truth is that the victim knows the
    offender about 80 percent of the time.  Obviously, if you people aren't
    aware of this, they don't have the knowledge they need to protect
    themselves.
    
    That's not the worst.
    
    A majority of the students polled held the victim responsible for the
    assault.
    
    More than half the students thought that "if a woman dresses
    seductively and walks alone at night, she's asking to be raped."  More
    than 25 percent thought that "if incest happens to someone over the age
    of 12, it could be the child's fault."
    
    This kind of ignorance is not going to lead young people to seek help
    if they've been assaulted (or know someone who has).
    
    In addition, most of the students felt there were circumstances where a
    man had the right to have sexual intercourse with a woman without her
    consent.
    
    A whopping 80 percent said a man had the right to force a woman if they
    were married.  Seventy percent said the man did not need the consent of
    the woman to have sexual intercourse if they were planning to get
    married.  Sixty-one percent said it was OK for hm to force here if they
    had had sex before.
    
    More than half said a man had the right to have sex with a woman
    without her consent if (1) she led him on, (2) she got him sexually
    excited or (3) they'd been dating for a long time.
    
    About 30 percent of the students said it was OK to force the woman if
    (1) she has had sexual intercourse with other men, (2) he is so turned
    on he can't stop or (3) she is drunk.
    
    Appalling, isn't it?
    
    If young people think this way, aren't they likely to accept or even
    encourage sexual assault?  If young people think this way, isn't it
    time we do whatever's necessary - in the home and in the classroom - to
    change their thinking?  Too complicated a subject?  Not if you start
    with this one sentence:
    
         If she (or he) says no, it's rape.
    
    Now which part doesn't your kid understand?

    
    
    I think the majority of the attitudes these kids show are learned from
    places other than in school.  In fact, I believe that sex education in
    schools is just not going to stand up to the pressures kids feel from
    the media.  Ever spend an afternoon watching MTV or VH1?  The message
    is that sex is what you are supposed to do to be cool.  MTV typically
    shows women barely naked being used as toys.  
    
    Rape is a crime of violence.  Yet violence is everywhere.  Until
    society wakes up and has had enough nothing will change.  Pretty
    grim, but awfully realistic.
    
    Michele

    A friend and I were discussing this the other night.  He brought up
    the movie Batman as an example.  Damned near every kid in America saw
    that movie and saw Kim Bassinger have a few drinks and the next scene
    is her waking up in bed with someone (I don't know who, didn't see the
    movie).  How many kids subliminally connected "get a woman drunk and
    you can take her to bed"?  And we wonder where our kids get their
    ideas!
    
    Karen

    I think citing Batman in this way _might_ be a bit oversensitive.
    
    Vicki Vale [Bassinger] was indeed a bit tipsy as they; however, _far_
    before she had her first sip of wine, it was quite apparent that she
    and Bruce Wayne had been smitten by instantaneous simultaneous
    crush/lust -- like at least one evening before the tipsiness occurred.
    
    Nit alert:
    
    She woke up in his bed, but he wasn't in it -- what woke her up was the
    creaking of some health-device that had him swinging suspended by hisd
    heels [remarkably bat-like].  Yes, I realise the the implication is the
    same.
    
      Annie