I just sent this email to my professor. Kind of nervous, kind of excited to see what happens.

Professor ———-,

I want to start by saying that I really like your class and your efforts to get us to challenge our beliefs. I feel like I have learned a lot about legal theory, how far the law can go and my own biases and perceptions of the law. When we started the section on Feminist Legal Theory I was incredibly worried and skeptical about how class discussions would go. I feel like this is the only topic we have talked about thus far that is not abstract, completely theoretical or something that doesn’t directly effect all of our lives on a daily basis. I’m happy to say that most of my worries were unfounded and I have enjoyed the discussions of the last two sessions. However, today ended on a very bad note in my opinion and I don’t feel like I completely got my point across.

I feel like you essentially proposed and defended the position that if a woman and man were consensual up until the point of intercourse, but she said no at the last minute and he struck her in response, that the woman should be just as responsible as the man and legal action on her part against him would be unfounded. I’m sure I’ll never be able to understand the physical pain you described at a man being deflated at such a time and I could respect that it would be frustrating but I think the missing aspect to our class discussion was how much pain the woman would be in if the man did strike out or continue any way. I think the emotional trauma inflicted by either of those scenarios would be exponentially worse than the annoyance or pain a man feels from the physical deflation or frustration. If it was really that bad, he could take care of it himself and then handle this like any other relationship problem, if it was truly a relationship. If it wasn’t a relationship, then he doesn’t have to see the girl again. If she felt the need to say no after leading him on to that point, she had a reason, no matter how small or insignificant it may seem and her reason would mean the world to her, especially if it was repressed through rape or violence.

I believe that you will probably agree with me on most of this. Or at least, I sincerely hope so. Based on our previous class discussions I think I can respect and discern your position as devil’s advocate from your normal demeanor or personal affiliations. However, I maintain this is an area of law and life that overlaps in such a way that makes playing devil’s advocated exponentially more dangerous than what we are used to.

I think you understand that as well. Throughout the past two class sessions you have been more open to diffusing potentially tense situations with humor than you normally are. I appreciate it and you have been very respectful. Even if you were speaking in jest about the physical discomfort a man may feel in such a situation, I feel like you took it too far and did perpetuate rape culture to a dangerous degree. I have faith in the people in our class and do not think any of them would have taken you seriously, however, with lesser students or with people less familiar with the type of discourse we are used to, your defense and victim blaming could be detrimental. Any one of my classmates could walk away from that discussion thinking that it is okay for a man to take out his aggression at being denied sex at the last minute with physical violence. I like to believe that none of them will think that but it could lead to victim blaming or being more accepting when a friend or acquaintance is recounting their own actions. To be specific, any guy or girl in that class could go home today, hear about a friend doing the same thing you proposed and not be as outraged as they should be because you gave them a legal ground to stand on.

That is perpetuation of rape culture. If you need something less hypothetical to go off of, consider that at the very least 2 women in our class will be or have been sexually assaulted and at least 4 women will experience domestic violence in their lifetime. Based on statistics it is unlikely any of the men in our class will ever be in a similar situation. You said my claim that it was rape culture was a hyperbole. I do not believe it was because of the discussion and what was left out. When you were saying there was no moral reason you shouldn’t skew recommendation letters to offset law schools’ use of affirmative action, you mentioned several times how you would never bring yourself to do such a thing. You spoke hypothetically while making your own thoughts on the subject very clear. In this situation, you never said you would never hit a woman in that case or would never resort to rape. I don’t believe you would do such a thing and I don’t think anybody in that class does, but not feeling the need to make your stance clear and defend your moral position is rape culture. I wish I could explain rape culture to you in a succinct way if you do not understand it from those examples. I think this page (http://shakespearessister.blogspot.com/2009/10/rape-culture-101.html), which is continually updated with examples of rape culture, accurately describes it. I hope you will take the time to read about it.

In light of this discussion I also want to change my semester paper topic from the Freedom From Religion Foundation to Rape Culture in the Law. I know it is late in the game but I feel like this is a topic that is more important to address at this point than religion in the judiciary. I look forward to talking to you further about this topic and my essay in office hours.

If it is still open, I would like to meet with you …..

-D