University Students Invent Fingernail Polish that Detects Date Rape Drugs

[TheHuckster]

Well done, Hyena. You made into words what my thoughts were on this topic that I couldn't have written nearly as well.

[Canarr]

well let's see, women and girls are generally told from a young age how to prevent being raped(while males are usually not sat down by parents/authority figures and told to respect boundaries, what constitutes consent vs. coercion-this is changing slowly), and then if when it does happen it's dismissed as not important.

Well, I certainly do remember being taught right and wrong as a child/teenager (bit of an ongoing process, of course). No, rape didn't get "special treatment" there, it was kind of a package deal with all other personal and property crimes: don't hurt other people, don't steal from them, don't kill them... do unto others, and all that.

Besides, if those rape facts you link are correct (and while some certainly are, others I have my doubts about)

Already posted the stats on rape and alcohol, but your understanding is dead wrong.

Rape myths

then consent isn't the problem, because anyone going out with a bag of roofies and the intent to rape isn't confused about boundaries or what, exactly, constitutes consent. He knows that full well - or he wouldn't have those drugs - and he just doesn't care. He's a criminal, simple as that.

Addendum to my last post: when I said "crime of opportunity", I wasn't trying to say that rape is the result of men just being unable to control their sexual impulses. They can; anyone can. What I meant was, people taking advantage of other people being in a state of reduced situational awareness, without having deliberately engineered that state (--> taking advantage of a girl sleeping drunkenly at a party, vs. having made her drunk by spiking her drinks). Sorry if that was unclear.

Look at various dictatorships, do they advertise that opposition will get you killed/imprisoned? When it does happen does anyone care? Does the victim have agency? Is the victim taken seriously by those that can do something about it?

Well... kind of, yes. Of course the victims have no agency against the state, because that's the point of a dictatorship. But in general, people living in fear of a secret police or similar do know what behavior triggers imprisonment or death - otherwise, the government couldn't use their tools and the fear they create to get the responses they want.

Except they're tied together. Look at your examples. Boys are picked on for being small, weak. What adjectives do people use to describe such individuals? What kind of phrases? "You throw like a girl!"; "Man up!" (as opposed to woman up); "Grow a pair!"; "Pussy!"; etc. A lot of insults we throw at less manly guys are in direct comparison to being a female. It is an insult to be a woman in our society's language. So if our language supports the idea that one gender is lesser than another, how far away is it that the "greater" group starts treating them poorly, up to and including violence of all types?

We see it in hate groups all the time.

Hyena Dandy already answered that beautifully. The point of calling a man a "Pussy!" is not to say, "You are a woman, and women are inferior!", it is to say, "You are an inferior man!" The difference is profound.

Any social animals congregate in groups. The larger the groups, and the more sophisticated the animal, the more and larger subgroups exist. But any social animal instinctively wants to belong to the group, wants to have status in the group. And one group member calling another a bad/weak member of the group is an attack on that member's status, nothing else.

A male calling another male a "Pussy!" is trying to show himself as the better male, and thus gain status.
A female calling another female out for not having children is doing the same - trying to make herself a better/more important member of the female group. It has nothing whatsoever to do with any kind of "rape culture".

Plus, as an aside: I've read quite a few articles from self-proclaimed feminists attacking other women for making the choice of staying at home and raising children - as if choosing to not "make something more" out of herself is treason to the cause. What kind of "culture" would that be?

[BlaqueKatt]

then consent isn't the problem, because anyone going out with a bag of roofies and the intent to rape isn't confused about boundaries or what, exactly, constitutes consent. He knows that full well - or he wouldn't have those drugs - and he just doesn't care. He's a criminal, simple as that.

and again that's only 2.4% the remaining 97.6% there's quite a few that fall under the problem of consent.
Accidental rapists

International study

survey of high school students

some really disturbing stats that prove more education is needed

In a survey of high school students, 56% of the girls and 76% of the boys believed forced sex was acceptable under some circumstances.

51% of the boys and 41% of the girls said forced sex was acceptable if the boy, "spent a lot of money" on the girl

male college students:
One in 12 admitted to committing acts that met the legal definitions of rape, and 84% of men who committed rape did not label it as rape.

43% of college-aged men admitted to using coercive behavior to have sex, including ignoring a woman's protest, using physical aggression, and forcing intercourse.

[Hyena Dandy]

Your numbers aren't as effective as you think.

The fact that people are more likely to admit to something when you use a term for it that is stigmatized doesn't mean they don't understand that it's wrong. People are more likely to see that question as an accusation. If you asked me if I've spent hours bullying people, then I'm more likely to say no, than if you ask if I've spent time making fun of roleplayers who don't meet my standards. That doesn't mean that I don't realize it was wrong or did it accidentally. It means that I am more likely to admit to wrongdoing if asked in a way that destigmatizes it.

Also, once you admit that you're not talking about situations like roofies, then "We need to teach men not to rape" is no longer a reasonable response to "We have a better way to detectroofies."

[Canarr]

and again that's only 2.4% the remaining 97.6% there's quite a few that fall under the problem of consent.
Accidental rapists

International study

survey of high school students

some really disturbing stats that prove more education is needed

It doesn't really matter whether or not a planned rape is committed using roofies, everclear, copious amounts of alcohol, a weapon or threats: it's still a matter of someone planning a crime, not someone misunderstanding consent.

Plus: the disturbing stats you quote are from studies conducted between the early 80s and 90s, so the are more than 20, sometimes more than 30 years old. Certainly interesting as a baseline to measure development in this ares compared to now, but hardly useful to draw any conclusions about present-day society.

[s_stabeler]

educating kids may well work for reducing rape long-term, however, that is not what the fingernail polish is designed to do. It's designed to tell you if your drink has X drug in it.

in a sense, it's similar to contraception. Does failure to use contraception mean you deserve an STD? No. Nor does this mean a woman who doesn't use it deserves to be raped. However, it is still a reasonable precaution where you are in a situation where your drink could have been spiked.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

Except... if you don't teach people what rape is in a legal sense then you're going to have a hard as fuck time trying to curb it. I think the first time I understood from a legal standpoint the nuance of what was treated as rape and what was not was in college which came up in a business law course. Obviously this comes up not so much because rape is a problem in business but because it's an easy way to look at legal ideas such as coercion and fraud and how it impacts scenarios.

The problem is, a majority of the American population is sexually active before they leave high school so you have missed the boat on a large number of people who may not get that sidebar. I think "teach men to not rape" is accusatory and wrong headed but teaching men what actually IS rape is not only a good idea, it's really shocking it doesn't come up in high school when men are horny bastards that are dealing with the most hormones they'll ever feel, contradictory information about their "manhood" and essentially have every reason to feel confused.

Honestly? If it wasn't couched in feminist/not feminist language (side stepping conservative types that think any teenagers reading anything about sex is icky) it would not be too hard to get it accomplished in some form of class. Both men and women getting the same information on what is and is not rape is not a bad thing.

[BlaqueKatt]

Plus: the disturbing stats you quote are from studies conducted between the early 80s and 90s, so the are more than 20, sometimes more than 30 years old. Certainly interesting as a baseline to measure development in this ares compared to now, but hardly useful to draw any conclusions about present-day society.

International study is from 2013, you have any evidence to support your claim that present day society is different? There's been exactly ZERO efforts focused on education and even more push for abstinence only which contains exactly ZERO information on sexual assault. Especially because the people that took these surveys are the current generation's parents. From what experience are they going to teach their children since they weren't taught?

[s_stabeler]

my point wasn't that there shouldn't be better education about what rape actually is, but that the fingernail polish isn't in competition with education.

basically, education works on a macro level- it (should) reduce rape rates nationally. Things like this fingernail polish work on a micro level- they reduce the chance that YOU are the one raped. Is it a good idea for kids to be properly educated in consent laws? Yes. Does that help you in a situation where you aren't sure if your drink has been spiked? No.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

Well if people would keep to the idea that it's not an either/or thing, things would be lovely. But people won't because there's a feminist and/or MRA boogieman to be slain. And until they do, I don't think people will spend to much time talking or implementing actual solutions.

What you'll get is this - university students coming up with these ideas on their own.

People spend a lot more time on rhetoric than actually fixing things these days.

[TheHuckster]

Except... if you don't teach people what rape is in a legal sense then you're going to have a hard as fuck time trying to curb it.

Quite honestly, I think the topic of "rape vs. non-rape" from a legal standpoint is not what to teach. All that is going to do is give some the impression that as long as it's not illegal it's okay. There are a lot of legal things you can do that can still leave deep emotional scars in a relationship which really should also be taught. A relationship needs to be based off of love and respect, and never control and deceit. That's really it.

[D_Yeti_Esquire]

That doesn't work because you're teaching people what your conception of an acceptable relationship is. There are enough people in BDSM, fwb, or in simple one night stands to remove the love requirement. Many people can and do have non-rape sex with people they don't respect. I'm not saying I would disagree with your best practice (it's mine as well), I'm just saying that wouldn't prevent rape out of ignorance.

That said, teaching people what the legal definition of consent is and how it can be taken or removed legally by circumstances is useful information. Having sex with an extremely drunk person for example even if you're tipsy enough that you're not thinking straight yourself. If you know there's no legal way for consent to occur in that scenario, you ARE informed that you're in danger of committing rape.

If you don't realize that the two of you having a good time with drugs can put you in that scenario though... well that's a scenario a lot of guys have made the wrong decision on because they just don't know.

[TheHuckster]

That doesn't work because you're teaching people what your conception of an acceptable relationship is. There are enough people in BDSM, fwb, or in simple one night stands to remove the love requirement.

And a lot of the people I've encountered who did at least one-night stands a lot regretted it later (both the guys and the ladies, mind you) because the person they were sleeping with really didn't give a shit about the other except that they were getting off. I'm of the opinion that if you're having sex just for your own sake and you don't give a damn about the person you're having sex with, you're a total scumbag. I feel like if you're going to just teach people how to have sex the legal consenting way, you're going to end up with quite a few who believe, "Well, she's an emotional wreck after I cheated on her and made her feel like crap, but it's OK because the cops aren't after me about it and she had consented."

BDSM is another thing entirely, though. People who confuse BDSM with rape must be the same people who confuse fictional movies with real life.

Many people can and do have non-rape sex with people they don't respect. I'm not saying I would disagree with your best practice (it's mine as well), I'm just saying that wouldn't prevent rape out of ignorance.

If you teach that women should not be coerced into sex, either by giving them false pretenses (e.g. "I'm here for a long-term relationship") or simply being a douche (e.g. "You owe me this") just to get sex, then the more heinous instances which cross the line into illegality will simply be more obvious (e.g. Well, if lying to them to get them to agree to have sex is wrong, then surely drugging them to do so must be really wrong)

If you don't realize that the two of you having a good time with drugs can put you in that scenario though... well that's a scenario a lot of guys have made the wrong decision on because they just don't know.

Don't get me wrong, I do think teaching what consent means is very important, but I also think teaching respect and how to have meaningful relationships where both people are strengthened personally by eachother will also greatly improve people's outlook on sex and love.

[Gravekeeper]

I feel like if you're going to just teach people how to have sex the legal consenting way, you're going to end up with quite a few who believe, "Well, she's an emotional wreck after I cheated on her and made her feel like crap, but it's OK because the cops aren't after me about it and she had consented."

Not that I disagree with your opinion but this would come to close to legislating morality. Besides, research has shown that a lot of how we view and conduct ourselves in relationships ( and view members of the opposite sex ) is derived from childhood observation of our parent's. Which is a much larger can of worms. We can't legislate mandatory relationship counselling ( Even if it would probably help the world at large ).

That said, sexual ethics and rights should be a normal component of sex education. I should also point out that it IS a normal component of sex education in Canada and I learned all of this stuff alongside sex education in secondary school. If you're curious, here are the guidelines for sex education in Canada.

But that brings up the more fundamental(ist) problem in the US where even teaching vaguely realistic non-abstinence based sex education is a farking up hill battle in many States. Despite the MOUNTAINS of evidence that demonstrate just how badly such education or complete lack of education adversely affects things such as teen pregnancy rates.

There is a correlation between sex education in regards to sexual ethics and sexual assault as well.

For example, behold our consent posters in Vancouver that are in bars and nightclubs. The VPD runs this campaign every year ( As do police in several Canadian cities now ). Within just 6 months of the first time the campaign was launched sexual assault rates dropped by 10%. All because of some simple informative ( and blunt ) reminder posters in drinking establishments.

[Hyena Dandy]

International study is from 2013, you have any evidence to support your claim that present day society is different?

You mean the international study which even admits that it's skewed due to the fact that it's international, and covers parts of the world that are culturally different from here? Look, if you're saying we need to make these changes in Southeast Asia, which the study says likely skewed the numbers, then I'm all for that. I was under the evidently mistaken impression you wanted the changes HERE.

Because if you want to make a change, you need to show that a change needs to be made. Not "A change needed to be made 20 years ago." Unless you're talking through a time portal, the fact that something used to be true, and you don't THINK it's changed, is irrelevant. We shouldn't be making policy based on the past.