OT Grant High School teacher's 'rape culture' paper sparks controversy

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Natebishop3

Don't tread on me!
Joined
Sep 17, 2008
Messages
94,242
Likes
57,506
Points
113
http://www.oregonlive.com/portland/...gh_school_teachers_rap.html#incart_river_home

A Grant High School history teacher's three-page written opinion about "rape culture" distributed this week among students and staff has prompted outrage for people inside and outside the Northeast Portland school.

It isn't clear what prompted teacher David Lickey to write the document – widely shared on Facebook -- that says, "I find assertions of rape culture dubious," and "The very wording of 'rape culture' seems to me a bit hysterical."

The document, dated May 2, is addressed to "esteemed students and Mr. Leeman," and begins with Lickey recounting that he had "interrupted your lesson and the train of your discussion in a way that was disruptive, for that I apologize."

The document goes on to say: "'Rape culture' is a theoretical construct that is ill defined. What exactly is 'rape culture'? I don't see it in my life or the lives of any of the men and women I have known. I have never met a person who believes rape is anything other than a heinous crime."

Other than the fact that I don't really understand why he wrote it and circulated it..... I don't really see anything wrong with what he said.

He says rape is a "heinous crime," but he doesn't believe that rape culture exists. He says that he has never met anyone who thought that rape was a good thing.

The comments from the school make no sense.

"included some statements that run counter to the way we approach this important subject. The perspective of the teacher does not reflect nor support our approach to educating students on sexual assault. A strong contradictory argument should be accompanied by counter arguments from credible sources.

"In this case, the document was shared with many students and staff with very little context. We apologize for any harm or negative impact. We are working with students and some staff members to organize listening sessions and opportunities for adults and students to get support. It is our primary goal to ensure Grant is a safe place for all."

What did he say that makes Grant less safe? The whole rape culture thing strikes me as another excuse to paint men as inherently evil and predatory. Just because this dude said that he doesn't think that there's a rape culture doesn't suddenly make the students less safe. That's absurd.

Either way... he's fucked. Dude is toast. I hope he doesn't apologize for his opinions. I just have no idea why he would publish it and pass it around. That part doesn't make a lot of sense to me.
 
No no, we need to educate women to fear men and think of them as scary predators.... and we need to make men feel bad about themselves and apologize for being inherently evil.
 
So the two teachers involved in this are 2 of The HCP Jr's teachers at Grant.

Mr. Lickey taught along side my dad there for 20 years. He was my wife's english teacher as well. Quality guy. Mr. Leeman went to Grant with me and is also a great guy. Whole neighborhood is buzzing about this. GHS is as liberal as they come. Parents were talking about this all during my daughters soccer game yesterday. Interesting to see how this pans out.
 
Last edited:
So the two teachers involved in this are 2 of The HCP Jr's teachers at Grant.

Mr. Lickey taught along side my dad there for 20 years. He was my wife's english teacher as well. Quality guy. Mr. Leeman went to Grant with me and is also a great guy. Whole neighborhood is buzzing about this. GHS is as liberal as they come. Parents were talking about this all during my daughters soccer game yesterday. Interesting to see how this pans out.
 
Whenever they pull these statistics for "women that are sexually assaulted", it is often a self assessment survey meaning that there is really no litmus or definition of sexual assault.
 
Whenever they pull these statistics for "women that are sexually assaulted", it is often a self assessment survey meaning that there is really no litmus or definition of sexual assault.
What kind of sexual activity do you suspect women are including in their personal definitions of sexual assault that you don't believe should be included?
 
What kind of sexual activity do you suspect women are including in their personal definitions of sexual assault that you don't believe should be included?

Its not quantifiable. Its whatever they interpret sexual assault to mean, therefore the statistics are invalid. It could be anywhere from some guy looking at them the wrong way to forcible rape.
 
Its not quantifiable. Its whatever they interpret sexual assault to mean, therefore the statistics are invalid. It could be anywhere from some guy looking at them the wrong way to forcible rape.
So, do you believe that women are including "forcible leering" in their responses of having been sexually assaulted?
 
So, do you believe that women are including "forcible leering" in their responses of having been sexually assaulted?

I can't know for sure. Its entirely possible though since it is basically a self-reported self-assessment.
 
I can't know for sure. Its entirely possible though since it is basically a self-reported self-assessment.
I didn't ask if you know--I asked if you believe. You seem afraid to answer a direct question. And based on your response, doesn't that also mean that it's entirely possible that some forms of contact that are generally considered sexual assault (unwelcome groping or impaired-capacity intimacy, for example) are excluded by some women who hold a stricter definition of the term?

Basically, it seems that you're dismissing the vastness of the problem based solely on an assumption regarding the validity of the statistics without any actual evidence to support your preconception.
 
I didn't ask if you know--I asked if you believe. You seem afraid to answer a direct question. And based on your response, doesn't that also mean that it's entirely possible that some forms of contact that are generally considered sexual assault (unwelcome groping or impaired-capacity intimacy, for example) are excluded by some women who hold a stricter definition of the term?

Basically, it seems that you're dismissing the vastness of the problem based solely on an assumption regarding the validity of the statistics without any actual evidence to support your preconception.

Yes. Because they always put out this "1 in 6" women are sexually assaulted in college when the entire premise of it is due to poor sampling data. They take a self-assessment as a fact of criminal activity.

Which is unfortunate because its done at a supposed institution of higher learning.
 
Probably irresponsible to discuss this topic without actually having a good understanding of how the concept of "rape culture" is defined. This link appears to be a good starting point: http://www.shakesville.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html

That article is difficult to read. Rather verbose, maybe long winded is the term. Sort of reminds me of a long winded explanation of White Privileged.

But if you guys even think it is close to the truth, then what the hell are you going to do about it? I mean 1 in 6 women? Then doesn't that suggest 15 to 20% of you you guys are assholes?
How does this get fixed? It can't be government. Who is going to lead the ass kicking needed here?
Or is the cry too loud, too often, from too few ?

Maybe I never knew, only saw from my view?
 
In this thread, a bunch of men in a sports forum comment on how rape is overblown.

No. Nobody is commenting on whether rape is overblown. The discussion is about whether there is a rape culture in America.

I have never, at any point in my life, been told by any person that rape is okay. I have never seen anyone condone rape. So to argue that somehow rape is acceptable in this country, or encouraged, is ridiculous to me.

I think that this country commodifies women. I think attractive women can be seen as a trophy or a possession. I think sex can be made to be an achievement for men, but I also think that women are willing to overlook a lot of things for a mate that has a good job and makes good money. You don't see a lot of attractive men dating rich old broads.

I also think that our society has created a difficult game where men have to initiate all the contact, and they are never provided much guidance on how to do that. So we men employ a number of methods to try to generate a relationship with someone out of thin air, and it's not always appropriate. So when you pair up the idea of women as a commodity and men encouraged to initiate interest, you have a very rough courtship, which is sometimes unwanted.
 
Last edited:
Yes. Because they always put out this "1 in 6" women are sexually assaulted in college when the entire premise of it is due to poor sampling data. They take a self-assessment as a fact of criminal activity.

Which is unfortunate because its done at a supposed institution of higher learning.
If you'd prefer more precise data, you can check out this article. http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/...y-the-numbers-sexualviolenceinhighschool.html

Of course, this is more focused on junior high and high school girls as opposed to college girls, so it's not a direct corollary. But still, the items in the "self-assessment" are much more rigidly defined than what you decry.
 
Two things that are culturally the fault of this country:

1. Women need to be encouraged to initiate the first move. There needs to be a better balance in that regard. I think this has actually come a long way, and more women are feeling emboldened to show an overt interest when they like someone. That's a great first step, but the stigma of women being "overly aggressive" or " slutty" if they approach guys needs to go away. It should not be the man's job. It shouldn't be anyone's job. If you like someone, let them know. Plain and simple.

2. Hollywood needs to stop promoting this BS myth that women just need to be pursued harder if they're not interested. No, standing outside their house holding a boom box is not a good way to show interest in someone. Or I guess the old rules still apply.......

Rule 1: be attractive.
Rule 2: don't be unattractive.

The whole process seems very broken, with a lot of misinformation and backwards ideas. Working up the courage to show interest in a girl doesn't actually entitle you to anything. Becoming friends with someone with the goal of winning them over is also a horrible move. Hollywood has put out this idea that if she just gets to know YOU, she'll fall head over heels. They have been putting these stupid ideas into the heads of young men for decades.

So on the one hand, we have a bunch of dudes who think they're the lead in a romantic comedy, and then on the other hand we have a bunch of guys who think women are just another toy to be collected and thrown away when they're finished. In the middle we have quite a few guys who "get it," but it's not nearly enough. Hell, it took a lot of trial and error before I found my wife.

But I refuse to accept that any of this is part of a "rape culture." It's just a horribly misguided way of selling movies and bad information handed down from father to son. Courtship should be taught in schools. Or at least the very basic concepts of attraction, self confidence, and interpersonal relationships.
 
If you'd prefer more precise data, you can check out this article. http://america.aljazeera.com/watch/...y-the-numbers-sexualviolenceinhighschool.html

Of course, this is more focused on junior high and high school girls as opposed to college girls, so it's not a direct corollary. But still, the items in the "self-assessment" are much more rigidly defined than what you decry.

If we are talking about a "rape culture", that would be having sex without consent or being forced to do something sexually against your own wishes, which chimes in at 4% for women and 2% overall.
 
If we are talking about a "rape culture", that would be having sex without consent or being forced to do something sexually against your own wishes, which chimes in at 4% for women and 2% overall.
So, you've decided to redefine the term to fit your preconception. Not surprising--it's the same thing the teacher did.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top