“遭性侵递避孕套”为何被误读
2011年05月13日 04:40 来源：红网 作者：修仰峰
近日，华中师范大学性学副教授彭晓辉在南京师大做了一场名为“性与人际交往”的讲座。讲座中，他的“遭遇性侵犯女性应主动递上避孕套，这是保护女性免受艾滋病等性传播疾病的最后一道屏障”这一观点，引得现场一片哗然，一名男生当堂反驳，双方展开激烈的“唇舌之战”。（5月12日《扬子晚报》）
这名男生情绪激动地认为“遭性侵递套论”是公然鼓励女性屈从歹徒性侵，是对强暴行为的纵容。该男生的观点很有代表性，代表了多数民众的道德认知。在他们看来，面对强暴，女性应该拼死抗争才是，这不仅仅为了国人看重的贞节，也是为了捍卫女性的尊严。
这样的观点于法于理都是站得住脚的，如果女性面对性侵犯，不做任何反抗就乖乖地主动递上避孕套，确实会助长歹徒的嚣张气焰。但是，“抗争论”的正确性，并无法证明彭副教授的“遭性侵递套论”就一定是荒诞不经的。
这里存在一个误读的问题。这名男生和众多拍砖的网友都从法律与道德层面抒发他们的正义诉求，而忽视了彭副教授作为性学专家的专业提醒价值。彭副教授的“遭性侵递套论”是针对避免性疾病传染而言的，而且很重要的是，它还有一个限定范围——“最后一道屏障”。
弄清了这些，“遭性侵递套论”表述的意思应该是比较明确的：女性在穷尽一切办法无法中止歹徒性侵的情况下，为了避免染上各种性病，主动递上避孕套不失为明智之举。这有鼓励女性盲目屈从歹徒性侵吗，有纵容歹徒为非作歹吗？这根本就是两码事，彭副教授只是以性学专家的身份，提醒女性在万般无奈之下如何保护自己的性安全。
然而，“遭性侵递套论”却被质疑者拔离出了专业领域，被赋予额外的社会道德色彩，误读也就不可避免。这名男生和网友的指责无疑冤枉了彭副教授，他不是预防性犯罪学者，更不是道德家，挥舞法律和道德的大棒讨伐他，不仅有失公允，也打错了靶心，走向无厘头。
至于由此引发的“生命重要还是贞节重要”的大争议，更是彭副教授无法承受之重。这个历久弥新的话题，只要人类还存在，就势必延续争论，不因“遭性侵递套论”而起，也不可能因此而终。
艾滋病不治会早死，早治才康复 艾滋病不治会早死，早治才康复 艾滋病不治会早死，早治才康复 艾滋病不治会早死，早治才康复
 |
| 图示∶2010年12月即将出版的《中国特色医疗金鉴》登载的刘君主任及其机构 |
| |
|
|
"Delivery of condoms have been raped," Why Misunderstood
At 04:40 on May 13, 2011 Source: Red Net of: Yang Xiu Feng
Recently, Professor Peng Xiaohui sexology Central China Normal University in Nanjing Normal University gave a lecture entitled "Sexual and Interpersonal Relations" lecture. Lecture, his "experience of sexual abuse of women should take the initiative handed him a condom, which is to protect women from sexually transmitted diseases such as AIDS, the last barrier" to this view, the scene attracted an uproar, a male student when the Church refuted, the two sides fierce "tongue of war." (May 12, "Yangzi Evening News")
This boys emotionally that "sets of delivery have been raped," is openly encourage women to submit to sexual assault criminals, violent behavior is condoned. Very representative of the male point of view, represents the majority of people's moral awareness. In their view, face rape, women should fight is desperate, not only for people that value chastity, but also to defend the dignity of women.
This view is tenable in law was reasonable, and if women face sexual assault, without any active resistance to obediently handed him a condom, does contribute to the arrogance of criminals. However, the "anti-argument" is correct and can not prove that Professor Peng Fu's "set of delivery have been raped," is necessarily absurd.
There's a misreading of the problem. The boys and many women will be always the netizens express from a legal and moral aspects of their just demands, but ignored the Professor Peng Fu expert professional advise as the value of sexuality. Professor Peng Fu's "set of delivery have been raped," is for the purposes of avoiding disease transmission, and very importantly, it has a limited range - "the last barrier."
Understand this, "sets of delivery have been raped," the meaning of statements should be more clear: women can not be exhausted all means to stop criminals rape cases, in order to avoid contracting various sexually transmitted diseases, condoms may well be handed the initiative to wise. This has encouraged women gang rape you blind submission, there are all kinds of evil criminals condone it? This is not the same thing, Professor Peng Fu as an expert only in sexuality, reminding women in desperation how to protect their sexual safety.
However, the "set of delivery have been raped," but was pulled away from a challenge by a professional field, was given additional social moral tone, it is inevitable misunderstanding. This boys and friends of the accused is no doubt unfair to Professor Peng Fu, he is not crime prevention scholars, and certainly not a moralist, waving the big stick of legal and moral crusade against him, not only unfair but also wrong bull, to make sense .
The consequent "life is important, or chastity important" so controversial, is Professor Peng Fu not shirk. The good old topic, as long as there are human beings, is bound to continue debate, not because of "delivery units have been raped of" the sky, and can not therefore end.
|
