4 ms·

But this explanation does not seem to match the facts. For example, many law professors are having to stop teaching rape law, because so many students say it ma

But this explanation does not seem to match the facts. For example, many law professors are having to stop teaching rape law, because so many students say it makes them uncomfortable[1]. Surely college students are capable of distinguishing between the threat of rape, and the discussion of relevant law in a classroom environment? So what is the safety issue here? Indeed, the end result will likely be a net lowering of safety in society as a whole, as a lack of expertise in rape law will make it harder to enforce and successfully prosecute. [1] http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rape-law http://www.newyorker.com/news/news-desk/trouble-teaching-rap...

ebola1717 11y ago
First of all, no one in that article is uncomfortable because they can't distinguish between "the threat of rape and and the discussion of relevant law." We're talking about survivors of sexual assault, for whom the often very explicit discussions of rape law can be emotionally taxing. You're right that we do need to teach rape law, now more than ever, and we need to be able to have these nuanced and explicit discussions - but there's ways to do that with empathy for survivors of sexual assault. And honestly, I don't see how warning the class about the content of a discussion beforehand or a few people abstaining (one's that likely wouldn't be participating much anyway) will drag down the entire system.
- forgottenpass 11y ago
  You seem to be arguing from a premise that disagrees with the grand-parent's comment: Grandparent: "Most times such people take offense it is not about feeling uncomfortable, but rather feeling unsafe." You: "very explicit discussions of rape law can be emotionally taxing." Why did you reply to parent? You should tell grandparent poster they're wrong. Otherwise you're just giving parent poster the impression they're in disagreement with a viewpoint that uses rhetorical shuffle and impossible to pin down.
taco_emoji 11y ago
> For example, many law professors are having to stop teaching rape law, because so many students say it makes them uncomfortable[1] Nowhere in your link does it say that any professor anywhere had to stop teaching rape law.

ebola1717 11y ago

First of all, no one in that article is uncomfortable because they can't distinguish between "the threat of rape and and the discussion of relevant law." We're talking about survivors of sexual assault, for whom the often very explicit discussions of rape law can be emotionally taxing. You're right that we do need to teach rape law, now more than ever, and we need to be able to have these nuanced and explicit discussions - but there's ways to do that with empathy for survivors of sexual assault. And honestly, I don't see how warning the class about the content of a discussion beforehand or a few people abstaining (one's that likely wouldn't be participating much anyway) will drag down the entire system.

forgottenpass 11y ago
You seem to be arguing from a premise that disagrees with the grand-parent's comment: Grandparent: "Most times such people take offense it is not about feeling uncomfortable, but rather feeling unsafe." You: "very explicit discussions of rape law can be emotionally taxing." Why did you reply to parent? You should tell grandparent poster they're wrong. Otherwise you're just giving parent poster the impression they're in disagreement with a viewpoint that uses rhetorical shuffle and impossible to pin down.

taco_emoji 11y ago

> For example, many law professors are having to stop teaching rape law, because so many students say it makes them uncomfortable[1] Nowhere in your link does it say that any professor anywhere had to stop teaching rape law.