Warwick student rejects consent lessons.

steddyeddy

Warwick University student George Lawlor refuses invite to consent classes. These classes claim to teach students about proper consent with members of the opposite sex. George gives his reasons in the Metro.

Some of his thoughts are detailed below. The question is, are rapists really committing acts like these because of lack of consent lessons? I'm divided on this. If it prevents even one rape then men and women need to attend these classes but on the other hand it reminds me of the South Park episode where people attened classes on how not to abuse their children.

A friend of mine who used to work with me in an abuse charity wanted to set something up that taught parents about how to not subtlety abuse their kids emotionally ect. I think he was a bit mad tbh and I think it would have insulted people hugely. Do people really need classes on things like this? Again I'm divided but I'd like to ask the question because maybe I'm misinformed. There actually could be some very essential information in these classes about sexual boundaries for men and women but maybe they shouldn't be called consent classes.

George Lawlor, a Warwick University student and a senior reporter at the Tab, posted an article about an invitation he was sent to some ‘consent lessons’ about sexual behaviour.
In the article, titled ‘Why I don’t need consent lessons’, George said: ‘I feel as if I’m taking the “wrong” side here, but someone has to say it – I don’t have to be taught to not be a rapist. That much comes naturally to me, as I am sure it does to the overwhelming majority of people you and I know.
‘Brand me a bigot, a misogynist, a rape apologist, I don’t care. I stand by that.’
He claimed that he was completely against the lessons and felt they were a waste of time. This, of course, sparked outrage, with someone calling it ‘one of the most ignorant, misinformed, short-sighted and downright incorrect articles I’ve ever read.’
And social media followed suit:

adocholiday

Yet another case of the world gone far too PC. Consent lessons FFS. Funnily enough the vast majority of us managed to get to the various stages of life that we are at without having raped someone. We are creating a world full of victims where the next group of people are just waiting for the next thing to be outraged at. Are we going to allow various institutions to be the administrators of responsibility from now on? An agency for this, a working group for that, a body for the other. It's maddening. What has happened to a bit of common sense and personal responsibility?

Medusa22

I have to say that having read his article, that I agree with him in the sense that I don't believe that consent classes will help to prevent rapes. The majority of people are not rapists and they already know how to interact with other humans and how to obtain consent. Sometimes the situation is a bit more nuanced, as we have had countless threads on what is and isn't rape on AH, and also what is and is not consent.

I disagree with his posting a photo of himself holding a sign that reads ''This is not what a rapist looks like'', unfortunately there is no way to identify what a rapist looks like, they don't wear signs and there is no certain ''look'', otherwise we'd be able to identify them for ourselves.

NachoBusiness

I do think sexual education at late stage primary level (5th or 6th class, maybe even 1st year secondary) should have an element of education regarding sexual urges, especially in the context of alcohol consumption, but this sounds like it was arranged by the 'gender studies' brigade and it was really just a finger wagging exercise more than anything else and so on that basis, I say fair play to him. Refreshing to know there are some young men at college that still have their balls intact.

Self-appointed teachers of consent: get off your f***ing high horse. I don’t need your help to understand basic human interaction. Secondly, go and do something. Real people need your help and they deserve better than you. Next time you consider inviting me or anyone else to another bulls**t event like this, have a little respect for the intelligence and decency of your peers. You might find that’s a more effective solution than accusing them of being vile rapists-in-waiting who can only be taught otherwise by a smug, righteous, self-congratulatory intervention.

steddyeddy

Medusa22 wrote: »

I have to say that having read his article, that I agree with him in the sense that I don't believe that consent classes will help to prevent rapes. The majority of people are not rapists and they already know how to interact with other humans and how to obtain consent. Sometimes the situation is a bit more nuanced, as we have had countless threads on what is and isn't rape on AH, and also what is and is not consent.

I disagree with his posting a photo of himself holding a sign that reads ''is this what a rapist looks like?'', unfortunately there is no way to identify what a rapist looks like, they don't wear signs and there is no certain ''look'', otherwise we'd be able to identify them for ourselves.

Yes I pretty much agree with this.

fizzypish

I think it was Jim Jeffries (comedian) talking about the 10 commandments. His viewpoint in a nut shell was: The commandments are fine but why the **** did they need to be written in stone or even made noted. Don't kill him, don't steal her ****, don't steal his wife...... I don't need to be told these things are wrong as an adult. I got it when I was five!

"Hey you need to do a course on not forcing yourself on women". "Naw man, thats ok. I knew not to do that since I was a sprog but in the event I'm lying, you can assume I knew what I was doing, am actually a piece of **** and should be knee capped and castrated".

..but this is the world we live in and its not getting better any time soon.

steddyeddy

I would rather shoot myself than inflict that sort of trauma on anyone and I'm fairly confident that most people feel that way. You don't need classes to think that way it's natural to feel repulsion to rape IMHO.

end of the road

adocholiday wrote: »

Yet another case of the world gone far too PC.

no . just simple stupidness. or at least thats what it was called in my day before wannabe derogatory terms like pc came into existence.

Potatoeman

The idea of what consent is in a university is not what most people would consider consent. Enthusiastic consent is not considered enough if the girl changes her mind later. There have already been threads on this forum where college guys were expelled without trial.

SEPT 23 1989

are today's students so thick that they need lessons like this?

biko

I like it. It goes along with the motto "You don't have to teach your daughters to dress or drink modestly if you teach your sons not to rape"

osarusan

I agree with a lot of what he says, but I'm a little confused as to how the invitation came about - it seems to have been an invite to an event on facebook - was he specifically invited, or was it everybody who was a facebook friend of the university, or union or something?

If it's one of those blanket invites to everybody and not specifically targeting anybody, he is probably going over the top:

he said he still found the invitation to be loathsome, adding: “It implies I have an insufficient understanding of what does and does not constitute consent and that’s incredibly hurtful. I can’t stress that enough.”

But if he was specifically invited ('that guy needs to come to this') I can see why he'd be angry.

bucketybuck

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

are today's students so thick that they need lessons like this?

No they aren't. Thats rather the whole point of the article...

fizzypish

Imagine how much of a psycho you'd be if you failed the course.

conorhal

SEPT 23 1989 wrote: »

are today's students so thick that they need lessons like this?

Perhaps an app would be best, their iPhones are the only things millennials pay attention to. They may well the the first generation to spend more time at opposite ends the sofa staring silently into glowing screens rather then getting busy on it.

BlaasForRafa

He's dead right to protest this, these classes are a patronising insult to decent men. They're a sign of how entrenched feminist ideology is getting in universities and academia and feed into the "all men are (potential) rapists" and "rape culture" myths.

Floppybits

Jaysus how did any of us 30+ ever get to this point in life without these sort of classes. It is shocking how this sort of thing is allowed and colleges and universities are allowing it. Someone is has to be taking the p*** with this crap.

strelok

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

He's dead right to protest this, these classes are a patronising insult to decent men. They're a sign of how entrenched feminist ideology is getting in universities and academia and feed into the "all men are (potential) rapists" and "rape culture" myths.

back when feminists were trying to make atheism plus a thing, there was a fantastic post on the a+ forums by some absolute ****ing spastic asking the community if it was a good idea to introduce himself to women as "hi, I'm ***** and I'm a potential rapist" so they understood that he "got it" and was on their side.

conorhal

BlaasForRafa wrote: »

He's dead right to protest this, these classes are a patronising insult to decent men. They're a sign of how entrenched feminist ideology is getting in universities and academia and feed into the "all men are (potential) rapists" and "rape culture" myths.

Occasionally the nutters even turn themselves in!

http://oxfordstudent.com/2015/10/10/student-activist-annie-teriba-to-resign-from-political-campaigning/

Teriba released the following statement on her Facebook profile, which she has since deleted. The statement has been reposted by the OUSU Women’s Campaign.
The full statement (which included trigger warnings for sexual assault and sexual violence), reads as follows:
“This statement explains why I will be stepping back from political campaigning from now.
(I owe you a proper explanation, so will go into details here which you may find triggering.)
At this year’s NUS Black Students’ Conference, I had sex with someone. The other party later informed me that the sex was not consensual. I failed to properly establish consent before every act. I apologise sincerely and profoundly for my actions. I should have taken sufficient steps to ensure that everything I did was consensual. I should have been more attentive to the person’s body language. In failing to clarify that the person consented to our entire encounter, I have caused serious irreparable harm.

It's a shame she had to step back from political campaigning, I'm sure she'll be a terrible loss to the Peoples Front of Judea......

steddyeddy

Some of the abuse the chap is getting on Twitter:

Speechless at how someone can undermine such important education that fills a crucial hole in our curriculum, awful:

I want a shower after reading that, what an angry little creepbag

The irony is that this is exactly the sort of twit who needs to go on a consent course. http://thetab.com/uk/warwick/2015/10/14/dont-need-consent-lessons-9925 … via @TheTabWarwick

The tweet in the middle is ironic considering the anger displayed by the tweeter.

valoren

Do women have to attend these classes? Or is it men only?

Will one of the lessons be titled, "Why you should not cry rape after giving consent 101"

What kind of an invitation was it? I got one in the mail inviting me to check out a double glazing firms windows, I didn't feel they were disparaging my own particular windows because I know that 'invite' isn't directed at me, Candie.

If someone addressed him specifically, knowing him and not pulling his name off some list, and told him he had to go learn how not to rape, then he should be livid. If it's an open letter type invitation, and it helps clear up someones misconceptions, then thats fine.

Most people need no clearing up, most people are just like me and going about their daily business and simultaneously not raping anyone. Sometimes people might need to find out how drunk is too drunk, or that I don't think so doesn't mean persuade me, or whatever, and while I imagine that's very rare, no one should be raped because one party is bad at communicating, and the other is bad at interpreting body language.

Potatoeman

steddyeddy wrote: »

Some of the abuse the chap is getting on Twitter:







The tweet in the middle is ironic considering the anger displayed by the tweeter.

The first quote. I thought it was about not filling holes.

Grab All Association

https://twitter.com/teutates1989/status/654607989421285376/photo/1

valoren

It reminds me of a video on Youtube a few years ago.
It was about how to breathe when running.

Some athlete type guy is blathering on with the following, "You'll want to breathe in *inhales* and then breathe out *exhales*" and continued to expound how important this was.

The top rated comment was the following.
"I'm an expert at that, after all I've been doing it since I was born!!!"

Being so arrogant as to lecture an intelligent group of people such as a student body on how not to rape is insulting.

imitation

Call me old fashioned but I dont think the sex ed class is a bad idea, yes it needs to be done right, mandatory for both sexs and approached right etc, but surely it cant hurt. There are a lot of 18/19 year olds who wont have thought about sex until they are in the heat of the moment. Thats where you get those gray area situations that end up ruining people with court cases. If a short class can help eliminate some of it then how bad.

valoren

valoren wrote: »

Being so arrogant as to lecture an intelligent group of people such as a student body on how not to rape is insulting.

I completely agree, but it's not a lecture delivered to the student body at large.

It's a lecture delivered to people who respond to a general invitation to attend.

I suspect this was just a blanket emailing notifying people of a lecture on consent (there's been a lot of talk about it lately online), and this guy wanted to stir up some outrage and decided to stick his tail up and take umbrage by interpreting it in the most personal way possible, hoping to get exactly the reaction he has.

conorhal

Candie wrote: »

I completely agree, but it's not a lecture delivered to the student body at large.

It's a lecture delivered to people who respond to a general invitation to attend.

I suspect this was just a blanket emailing notifying people of a lecture on consent (there's been a lot of talk about it lately online), and this guy wanted to stir up some outrage and decided to stick his tail up and take umbrage by interpreting it in the most personal way possible, hoping to get exactly the reaction he has.

I'd say the same of the organizers, who will no doubt smugly suggest that this incident demonstrates why these classes need to be mandatory.

Maguined

Candie wrote: »

What kind of an invitation was it? I got one in the mail inviting me to check out a double glazing firms windows, I didn't feel they were disparaging my own particular windows because I know that 'invite' isn't directed at me, Candie.

If someone addressed him specifically, knowing him and not pulling his name off some list, and told him he had to go learn how not to rape, then he should be livid. If it's an open letter type invitation, and it helps clear up someones misconceptions, then thats fine.

Most people need no clearing up, most people are just like me and going about their daily business and simultaneously not raping anyone. Sometimes people might need to find out how drunk is too drunk, or that I don't think so doesn't mean persuade me, or whatever, and while I imagine that's very rare, no one should be raped because one party is bad at communicating, and the other is bad at interpreting body language.

Facebook Event invitation organised by the students union. There was 300 people invited to the event which was targeted at freshers but the college has nearly 13k undergraduates but it doesn't give a breakdown how many are freshers.

conorhal

conorhal wrote: »

I'd say the same of the organizers, who will no doubt smugly suggest that this incident demonstrates why these classes need to be mandatory.

Then he's playing right into their hands.

When I come across something obviously ridiculous and unrelated to my life, I do the sensible thing and I ignore it.

He should have done the same, but now he's all notorious and bad-ass and sticking it to those crazy rad-fems. So he's no different, really.

conorhal

Candie wrote: »

Then he's playing right into their hands.

When I come across something obviously ridiculous and unrelated to my life, I do the sensible thing and I ignore it.

He should have done the same, but now he's all notorious and bad-ass and sticking it to those crazy rad-fems. So he's no different, really.

These loons have pretty much taken over university politics as a result of that kind of shrugging apathy, a halt needs to be called to their antics at some point, but it would of course be a braver (or more foolish) person then I to do so.
In truth the 'reaction' is just another example of the 'no-platform' shouting down of dissent that has become all to common, even here, where national issues of immigration or travellers or no doubt this nonsense will be quietly moved and closed on 'Irelands biggest forum'.

Kev W

conorhal wrote: »

I'd say the same of the organizers, who will no doubt smugly suggest that this incident demonstrates why these classes need to be mandatory.

I love the phrase "no doubt".

It allows one to cluck their tongue and roll their eyes at the completely imagined actions of others.

Good stuff.

steddyeddy

Candie wrote: »

Then he's playing right into their hands.

When I come across something obviously ridiculous and unrelated to my life, I do the sensible thing and I ignore it.

He should have done the same, but now he's all notorious and bad-ass and sticking it to those crazy rad-fems. So he's no different, really.

Yes he is. He's demonstrating and publicly speaking out against idiocy like this.

conorhal

Kev W wrote: »

I love the phrase "no doubt".

It allows one to cluck their tongue and roll their eyes at the completely imagined actions of others.

Good stuff.

A bit like the student union in this case, no?

steddyeddy

conorhal wrote: »

These loons have pretty much taken over university politics as a result of that kind of shrugging apathy, a halt needs to be called to their antics at some point, but it would of course be a braver (or more foolish) person then I to do so.
In truth the 'reaction' is just another example of the 'no-platform' shouting down of dissent that has become all to common, even here, where national issues of immigration or travellers or no doubt this nonsense will be quietly moved and closed on 'Irelands biggest forum'.

Correct me if I'm wrong but these examples of social Darwinism don't seem as prevalent in Ireland thankfully.

Duggy747

I love it, the reactions are that he should've taken the course or shut his mouth.

Kev W

conorhal wrote: »

A bit like the student union in this case, no?

The imaginary one that you said called for the lecture to be mandatory? Yes, I suppose.

Why was he invited to attend the classes? Who else was invited?

This kind of sh1t really bothers me and I would absolutely not go either.

Maguined

Duggy747 wrote: »

I love it, the reactions are that he should've taken the course or shut his mouth.

We don't care about your consent now shut up and learn about consent!

Grab All Association

Deleted User wrote: »

Why was he invited to attend the classes? Who else was invited?

This kind of sh1t really bothers me and I would absolutely not go either.

RAPIST!

The PC brigade is coming woo woo woo woo woo

Time for some re-femication

discus

TOXIC MASCULINITY

strelok

discus wrote: »

TOXIC MASCULINITY

bit redundant, surely

Zillah

On one hand I can completely understand someone being outraged at the implication that they are a potential rapist.

On the other hand, I think a huge amount of rape revolves around the perception that certain things aren't "really" rape in the mind of a lot of people, especially young men, especially when it comes to alcohol. Contrary to popular perception rapists aren't slavering monsters stalking in the shadows. A lot of them are otherwise normal guys who see someone vulnerable and convince themselves that it's not that bad. They probably have a little voice telling them no at the same time, and I think that voice would be a lot louder and stronger if they had had someone look them in the eye previously and tell them with no ambiguity that if she is too drunk to talk to you properly then it is rape.

Problems specific to this situation: if he personally was invited, as opposed to blanket invites, that's outrageous and deserves to be called out.

It's an invite only course, as opposed to something mandatory done, say, at the end of second school as a part of sex ed: so the only people that will attend are the people you're probably not worried about.

It's hijacked by a bunch of strident misandrists that want to demonise men: calling him a rapey creepbag for insisting that he understands consent and would never violate it, with or without such a class, is an abhorrent, idiotic, and self-defeating thing to do.

EazyD

It's just the feminists shouting again folks, back to work.

conorhal

Kev W wrote: »

The imaginary one that you said called for the lecture to be mandatory? Yes, I suppose.

No doubt you intended that sentence to make sense.

Is it just men that are "invited" to attend?

Surely this is no more than gender profiling.

wakka12

Such bs. Gay guys sit it too do they? Just because theyre male

Tarzana2

Medusa22 wrote: »

I disagree with his posting a photo of himself holding a sign that reads ''This is not what a rapist looks like'', unfortunately there is no way to identify what a rapist looks like, they don't wear signs and there is no certain ''look'', otherwise we'd be able to identify them for ourselves.

+1

Or indeed herself, as women can be rapists too.

Zillah

Deleted User wrote: »

Is it just men that are "invited" to attend?

Surely this is no more than gender profiling.

The vast majority of rapists are men though, in fairness; are we really going to throw a hissy fit over anti-rape campaigns being focused on men?

EazyD

Tarzana2 wrote: »

+1

Or indeed herself, as women can be rapists too.

Not in Ireland anyway, one must possess a penis to be able to do so.

Gongoozler

I would never in a million years have thought Ched Evans could be found guilty of rape based on the fact that the girl was too drunk to be able to knowingly consent. So, considering that's a law now and you can go to prison for it, I think it's quite important that people learn all the ways you can get to being called a rapist. The 'knock you over the head and rape you' type of rapist most likely wouldn't be influenced at all by classes such as these.