PDA

View Full Version : One in five women raped in US: report



ambidex
23 Jan 14,, 14:41
One in five women raped in US: report | NDTV.com (http://www.ndtv.com/article/world/one-in-five-women-raped-in-us-report-474683?pfrom=home-rightnow)

Report
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/sv-datasheet-a.pdf

Doktor
23 Jan 14,, 14:45
Speaking of under-reporting sexual crimes.

Dreadnought
23 Jan 14,, 15:22
Cant say I agree with that statement. Nor those numbers.

If its true, they have been hiding an awful lot and should be fired for the cover up. You hear all kinds of stats boasted by them to improve their image, lets see them improve this image.

Doktor
23 Jan 14,, 15:43
Cant say I agree with that statement. Nor those numbers.

If its true, they have been hiding an awful lot and should be fired for the cover up. You hear all kinds of stats boasted by them to improve their image, lets see them improve this image.

Well it's the WH report, no wonder you cast doubts.

tuna
23 Jan 14,, 16:06
I'd agree with the numbers. I'm not a Republican congressman or a liberal actress rape is rape, whether it is done in the alley or the marital bed. With the prevalance of date rape drugs like Rufies and just plain pressure from aggressive dates, 1 in 5 actually seems low to me.

Dreadnought
23 Jan 14,, 16:19
After reading the real article in the Philadelphia Inquirer a few moments ago,

1 in 5 women in college, Not in the US as a whole but in college.

Still a MAJOR problem, but now I can agree with the numbers about college!

Sometimes the news tools just cant get enough. Especially the facts.:rolleyes:

Another reference:http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/01/22/white-house-task-force-seeks-to-tackle-college-sexual-assault

kato
23 Jan 14,, 16:57
Still a MAJOR problem, but now I can agree with the numbers about college!

Also note that it's about sexual assault, not rape. "Sexual assault" has about fifty different definitions in the USA - at least one for each state - and typically includes any noncensentual sexual contact of any shape or form.

There was a study in 1987 about rape at US colleges, resulting in a media-friendly result that supposedly 12% of female students suffered a rape and a further 15% suffered attempted rape. The problem in this study was that the question set resulted in a positive rape evaluation even if the woman never checked any boxes saying she felt victimized or had grievances about the act. Once the study was reevaluated for only victimized rape victims the number dropped to 4.5%.

Albany Rifles
23 Jan 14,, 18:19
To satellite of of what Dread and Kato said rape and sexual assault are 2 different items.

But both are totally reprehensible, are inexcusable and cannot be tolerated.

That said the NDTV report is just flat wrong. In light of some of the more recent incidents of rape in India, to include today the rape of a young woman by members fo her tribe as a punishment, one wonders if this was a case an editorial decision to make a case of "see, all countries are bad!" or just poor reporting.

antimony
23 Jan 14,, 18:55
To satellite of of what Dread and Kato said rape and sexual assault are 2 different items.

But both are totally reprehensible, are inexcusable and cannot be tolerated.

That said the NDTV report is just flat wrong. In light of some of the more recent incidents of rape in India, to include today the rape of a young woman by members fo her tribe as a punishment, one wonders if this was a case an editorial decision to make a case of "see, all countries are bad!" or just poor reporting.

AR,

The original report was in usnews.com, not NDTV.

Also, I do not see NDTV benefitting much from the "see all countries are bad".

This is an India based entity, would you even know about it if was not posted here?

In a separate note, men are shit across the world and women are right to be apprehensive and careful everywhere they go. Its just that, in some parts, they would get protection and justice better than in other parts.

Dreadnought
23 Jan 14,, 18:59
The only way to fix this,

With the technology thats out there someone should be able to come up with a purely defensive measure to protect against this. Something a girl can wear like a ring or bracelet or neck chain that emits either a window shattering ear drop shattering sound or ultra blinding light. Long enough for them to get out of danger and identify their attacker.

If a proven, affordable method of this was developed, just think of what it would change.

antimony
23 Jan 14,, 20:07
The only way to fix this,

With the technology thats out there someone should be able to come up with a purely defensive measure to protect against this. Something a girl can wear like a ring or bracelet or neck chain that emits either a window shattering ear drop shattering sound or ultra blinding light. Long enough for them to get out of danger and identify their attacker.

If a proven, affordable method of this was developed, just think of what it would change.

Dread,

In the US, women have a bunch of tools. They can carry tasers, pepper spray and if they want, they can even pack. None of that seemed to have really helped, especially in SA, which is mental as much as physical.

Also, given the no. of instances within the military, seems like men will have their way any time they see a female is vulnerable.

TopHatter
23 Jan 14,, 20:08
one wonders if this was a case an editorial decision to make a case of "see, all countries are bad!" or just poor reporting.

Of course it is. The "you too (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque)" fallacy is a tried-and-true method of replying to stinging criticism.

tuna
23 Jan 14,, 20:15
Dread,

In the US, women have a bunch of tools. They can carry tasers, pepper spray and if they want, they can even pack. None of that seemed to have really helped, especially in SA, which is mental as much as physical.

Also, given the no. of instances within the military, seems like men will have their way any time they see a female is vulnerable.


But remember, this article is for attacks on college women, and most colleges have no weapons policys. I was spoken to once during a night class when I cut something (can't remember, a menial chore for a pocketknife) and the instructor told me that my small pocketknife (nothing tactical, think "gentleman's knife") could be considered a weapon and get me expelled. WTF?

Also, privately owned weapons are usually forbidden on military bases.

Once again, the predators prey on the weak, and the defenseless.

antimony
23 Jan 14,, 20:38
Of course it is. The "you too (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque)" fallacy is a tried-and-true method of replying to stinging criticism.

TH,

Please refer to my point above. This is a domestic channel, not something the world would typically notice. If you want to question Ambi's motives on posting it here, you can, but the news article seems genuine, especially as it was sourced from a US outlet.

Regardless of that, the facts themselves are scary, especially when I think that my daughters would go to college in 10-15 years from now.

antimony
23 Jan 14,, 20:39
But remember, this article is for attacks on college women, and most colleges have no weapons policys. I was spoken to once during a night class when I cut something (can't remember, a menial chore for a pocketknife) and the instructor told me that my small pocketknife (nothing tactical, think "gentleman's knife") could be considered a weapon and get me expelled. WTF?

Also, privately owned weapons are usually forbidden on military bases.

Once again, the predators prey on the weak, and the defenseless.

So, those keychain pepper sprays are "weapons" now??? Who is going to know if you carry one?

bigross86
23 Jan 14,, 20:43
I have no respect for any man that forces himself upon women in any form, fashion or manner. One of my new co-workers is more than a bit of a sleaze (and I have no idea how his girlfriend of 2 years puts up with him), and it astonishes me that people like him still exist, who think of women that way. Women should be treated as the goddesses they are, that deign to speak with us foolish men and to make our lives that much better merely by their presence. Anyone who thinks otherwise, that women were put on this planet to serve us, is a bloody moron.

That being said, and once again reiterating that I have boundless respect for women (and not just cause I'm getting married), the other side also needs to be mentioned. It is a known fact that women use the weapon of rape or sexual harassment accusations against men as a tool in many power struggles, and false accusations are frequently used. IN many cases it doesn't even take much, as her word is usually taken over his. Even once the man has been vindicated, his name has still been dragged through the mud, something which will affect him for the rest of his life, he'll always be "that guy who raped/sexually assaulted that girl". According to various studies, false accusations make up anywhere between 1.5% and 8% (even over 40% in some studies) of all accusations. Most experts believe that the false accusation rate is over 8%.

Draw the conclusions you wish, I'll just end my piece by saying A) Men who treat women as anything less than goddesses are shite scum and deserve a severe beating, and B) more than just some women have no problem getting down and dirty, lying in order to screw a man over, ironically, using that very same word.

tuna
23 Jan 14,, 21:46
So, those keychain pepper sprays are "weapons" now??? Who is going to know if you carry one?

Yes, they are weapons now. In fact, in Massachusetts, you cannot posess one without the same permit you need to carry a firearm. Though, if you wish, you can apply for a permit for mace only, that costs $25 instead of $100.

As for who's going to know - concealed is concealed.

Of course, if you need to use it, now you run the risk of getting in trouble for abusing the poor scumbag with your illegal weapon. I wish I was making this up.

omon
23 Jan 14,, 22:43
i wonder did they inclue statuary rape in their stats too.

FJV
23 Jan 14,, 23:15
Unless I can verify the exact methodology used, I'm not trusting this research.

CDC study on sexual violence in the U.S. overstates the problem - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/cdc-study-on-sexual-violence-in-the-us-overstates-the-problem/2012/01/25/gIQAHRKPWQ_story.html)


Consider: In a telephone survey with a 30 percent response rate, interviewers did not ask participants whether they had been raped. Instead of such straightforward questions, the CDC researchers described a series of sexual encounters and then they determined whether the responses indicated sexual violation. A sample of 9,086 women was asked, for example, “When you were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent, how many people ever had vaginal sex with you?” A majority of the 1.3 million women (61.5 percent) the CDC projected as rape victims in 2010 experienced this sort of “alcohol or drug facilitated penetration.”

What does that mean? If a woman was unconscious or severely incapacitated, everyone would call it rape. But what about sex while inebriated? Few people would say that intoxicated sex alone constitutes rape — indeed, a nontrivial percentage of all customary sexual intercourse, including marital intercourse, probably falls under that definition (and is therefore criminal according to the CDC).

Annoyingly I also cannot verify the quoted text above.

So who is right?
- The CDC research.
- The author of this opinion piece.
Both have an agenda.

Even in the full report.
https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/183781.pdf

I cannot find which questions were asked,

FJV
23 Jan 14,, 23:41
Checking against another survey:
http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fvsv9410.pdf

These people also publish their questionnaires (you can at least examine flaws in their methods):
Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) - National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) (http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=dcdetail&iid=245)

They give a number ranging from 5 per 1000 to 2 per 1000 for a 2 year rolling average.

If I were to take a 50 year period this gives between:
-250 per 1000 (1 in 4)
-100 per 1000 (1 in 10)

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 00:50
After reading the real article in the Philadelphia Inquirer a few moments ago,

1 in 5 women in college, Not in the US as a whole but in college.

Still a MAJOR problem, but now I can agree with the numbers about college!

Sometimes the news tools just cant get enough. Especially the facts.:rolleyes:

Another reference:http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2014/01/22/white-house-task-force-seeks-to-tackle-college-sexual-assault

Sir, the one you have linked in, is a separate report/issue.

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 00:58
To satellite of of what Dread and Kato said rape and sexual assault are 2 different items.

But both are totally reprehensible, are inexcusable and cannot be tolerated.

That said the NDTV report is just flat wrong. In light of some of the more recent incidents of rape in India, to include today the rape of a young woman by members fo her tribe as a punishment, one wonders if this was a case an editorial decision to make a case of "see, all countries are bad!" or just poor reporting.


Indian's should see that it didn't took American poster with a rank above all, a page down to call it NDTV propaganda.

This is directly from White House blog; A Renewed Call to Action to End Rape and Sexual Assault | The White House (http://www.whitehouse.gov/blog/2014/01/22/renewed-call-action-end-rape-and-sexual-assault)


The statistics around sexual assault in this country are nothing short of jarring. A report just released by the White House Council on Women and Girls entitled, “Rape and Sexual Assault: A Renewed Call to Action” reveals that nearly 1 in 5 women, and 1 in 71 men have experienced rape or attempted rape in their lifetimes.

NDTV has published this report only on its website, and they are reporting live and every 5 minute about the despicable rape that has happened in WB, hell even now when I am typing this.

Officer of Engineers
24 Jan 14,, 01:02
Indian's should see that it didn't took American poster with a rank above all, a page down to call it NDTV propaganda.You don't get. Exaggerating the statistics is just as harmful as ignoring it. It's the CRY WOLF syndrome.

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 01:04
You don't get. Exaggerating the statistics is just as harmful as ignoring it. It's the CRY WOLF syndrome.

But who is the authority here to call it exaggeration or cover up ? Washington Post or Washington DC.

Officer of Engineers
24 Jan 14,, 01:05
You're the one who posted the link. Should you not be responsible for what you post?

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 01:19
You're the one who posted the link. Should you not be responsible for what you post?

I am responsible to what I post; to best of my knowledge.

I have posted a white house link. I have posted the PDF link of report. It is sourcing out from White house.

Please tell us if it is an exaggeration or cover up.

One good poster has already suggested It is 1/5 for college going students, I reckon it is a rather more disturbing fact regardless how many statistics it may slash.

Regards.

antimony
24 Jan 14,, 01:22
Yes, they are weapons now. In fact, in Massachusetts, you cannot posess one without the same permit you need to carry a firearm. Though, if you wish, you can apply for a permit for mace only, that costs $25 instead of $100.

As for who's going to know - concealed is concealed.

Of course, if you need to use it, now you run the risk of getting in trouble for abusing the poor scumbag with your illegal weapon. I wish I was making this up.

Wow, that's just asinine. And MA has THE best colleges!!!

Officer of Engineers
24 Jan 14,, 01:33
I am responsible to what I post; to best of my knowledge.

I have posted a white house link. I have posted the PDF link of report. It is sourcing out from White house.

Please tell us if it is an exaggeration or cover up.

One good poster has already suggested It is 1/5 for college going students, I reckon it is a rather more disturbing fact regardless how many statistics it may slash.

Regards.The 1 in 5 with sexual assualt. All rapes are sexual assualts but not all sexual assualts are rape. You grope a woman without her permission. That's sexual assault. But it is not rape.

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 01:58
The 1 in 5 with sexual assualt. All rapes are sexual assualts but not all sexual assualts are rape. You grope a woman without her permission. That's sexual assault. But it is not rape.

Both are felonies in US jurisdiction.

The report published have used word rape very clearly. I hope they are aware about distinction between Rape and Sexual assault or more specific definition of penetration or no penetration if at all matters by US law/ jurisprudence.

Recently India government has drafted a law in which the distinction between sexual assault and rape has been made almost permeable, I am sure more uncompromising laws exists in USA.

Officer of Engineers
24 Jan 14,, 03:36
Both are felonies in US jurisdiction.Of course they are but within context here, the analogy is a difference between a drunken brawl and murder.


The report published have used word rape very clearly. I hope they are aware about distinction between Rape and Sexual assault or more specific definition of penetration or no penetration if at all matters by US law/ jurisprudence.

Recently India government has drafted a law in which the distinction between sexual assault and rape has been made almost permeable, I am sure more uncompromising laws exists in USA.But in the context of colleges? Understandable while still not acceptable. A bunch of young boys and girls at a party drunk out of their minds. Tell me that groping is not going on AND not all of it are the boys' fault.

bonehead
24 Jan 14,, 04:29
Under the definitions being given for "sexual assault" the assault rate has to be lower now than in the 60's-70's. Slapping your waitress on the rump was considered a pre tip requirement. "One in five women raped" I am just going to have to see all the data on that. On the surface I expect a lot more blood on the street if it were true.


Getting realistic numbers is never going to happen though. People have differing views on what is sexual assault and some people just plain lie. Mostly this is a respect issue, or lack thereof. My kids are taught to respect people and if it looks like something like this is going to happen to any of them, people are going to pity the fool that messed with my kids.

sated buddha
24 Jan 14,, 06:11
I'm a little confused about this.

By all reports, regardless of reports of trigger happiness and excessive force and racial profiling in many cases, as well as the varying degrees of corruption in the force, not to mention a problem with excessive and oftentimes illegal strip searches in some departments, the American police are supposed to be by and large quite professional and efficient. So it would stand to reason that a problem of this magnitude would have surfaced a lot earlier in a legally astute society like the US. And lets face it fair and square, impartially - 1 in 5 is a HUGE problem (its the equivalent of 10 little girls from a class of 50 growing up in school looking at the inevitability of being raped at least once in their lifetimes).

So as many members here are saying that its probably under reporting, my question is, why? Americans in general stand up for their rights strongly. Not only their own, but that of citizens of other nations as well. The legal system is strong, there are lawyers for everything, the smallest of things go to court, and justice is more often than not quick and fair. And their police in all likelihood would have systems and methods and attitudes in place that would be conducive to a rape victim approaching them for help and justice. As against women of other countries who fear the police as much as the actual rape. So why then have al these rapes gone unreported?

1 in 5 means that there should be somewhere in the region of 30 million American women out there who have been raped at some time or the other. I am not getting this.

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 07:41
That said the NDTV report is just flat wrong.

It doesn't bother to explain how the figures were arrived at or what they represent - of course, that would defeat the purpose of the exercise.

There is simply no way to know just how prevalent rape is. Police reports won't get us anywhere close. Properly conducted surveys are probably more accurate, but that is a measure of relative accuracy, not an absolute statement. The US figure is not dissimilar to the Australian one for 'sexual assault' based on surveys done here. I can certainly think of a number of women I know who have been sexually assaulted in some way, though probably only one who was raped. I'm betting there are others who would never say anything.


In light of some of the more recent incidents of rape in India, to include today the rape of a young woman by members fo her tribe as a punishment, one wonders if this was a case an editorial decision to make a case of "see, all countries are bad!" or just poor reporting.


I don't think there is much 'wonder' about it. Not only is the appearance of this article about the most predictable news report in history, but the appearance of this thread may rank as the single most predictable moment in WAB history. Is anyone here even a tiny bit surprised by the appearance of the thread or the source?

Rape is one of the most disturbing & serious crimes imaginable. To see it used in an attempt at a 'square up' based on some misguided sense of nationalism can only be described as pathetic. That it was so obviously going to happen simply reinforces that description.

This should save some time on the next thread:

Rape & Sexual Assault in Australia (http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/statistics.html)

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 08:03
I'm a little confused about this.


We'll try to help.


By all reports, regardless of reports of trigger happiness and excessive force and racial profiling in many cases, as well as the varying degrees of corruption in the force, not to mention a problem with excessive and oftentimes illegal strip searches in some departments, the American police are supposed to be by and large quite professional and efficient. So it would stand to reason that a problem of this magnitude would have surfaced a lot earlier in a legally astute society like the US.

You might need to explain exactly what you mean here by the problem 'surfacing'. Keep in mind this is a complex issue of definition & data gathering.


And lets face it fair and square, impartially - 1 in 5 is a HUGE problem (its the equivalent of 10 little girls from a class of 50 growing up in school looking at the inevitability of being raped at least once in their lifetimes).

It is a huge problem indeed.


So as many members here are saying that its probably under reporting,

It is hard to be certain about that. 'Under-reporting' when applied to police reports is undoubtedly correct. People usually arrive at that conclusion by pointing to surveys like this.


my question is, why? Americans in general stand up for their rights strongly. Not only their own, but that of citizens of other nations as well. The legal system is strong, there are lawyers for everything, the smallest of things go to court, and justice is more often than not quick and fair. And their police in all likelihood would have systems and methods and attitudes in place that would be conducive to a rape victim approaching them for help and justice. As against women of other countries who fear the police as much as the actual rape. So why then have al these rapes gone unreported?


Most rapes are 'he said/she said'. There isn't always physical evidence, either because it isn't there, or because the rape isn't reported. Worse, an overwhelming majority of rapes & sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone known to the victim. I knew a girl whose ex-boyfriend forced her to have sex the week after they broke up. He was in a poor mental state & attempted suicide a while later. She sat with him for days & they kept in contact for years later. It would never have occurred to her to report him, but she would have qualified as being raped under this survey. So would women whose husbands or boyfriends forced them to have sex when they objected. In many parts of the world there is no concept of rape in marriage and even in our society I am betting many wives would not report some instances that would qualify as rape. Changing attitudes to what 'rape' means increases the possible number of situations where it might occur.

No matter how good the police force, the nature of rape means that a lot of women simply don't want to report it. Rape trials are hard & it can often be hard to prove


1 in 5 means that there should be somewhere in the region of 30 million American women out there who have been raped at some time or the other. I am not getting this.

If you have a look at how the figure was arrived at the percentage of penetrative rape was a bit over 12%

Remember that this figure is based on a survey. It would be advisable to dig onto precisely how the figures were compiled to be certain what they mean. They may be accurate, they may not. They do indicate that the scale of the problem remains MUCH higher than is acceptable.

sated buddha
24 Jan 14,, 08:31
You might need to explain exactly what you mean here by the problem 'surfacing'. Keep in mind this is a complex issue of definition & data gathering.

Rapes happen everywhere, that's not the issue. But this report (which is a US one by the way, so I do not see the need to come down on the suspected motivations of either the Indian news agency or the Indian WABber - or is it WABbit - in reporting such. Just as there was no place for suspecting the motivations of Western media or WABbers/WABits when they highlighted similar crimes in developing countries such as India) suggests a magnitude that has taken many here, including me, by surprise. We should discuss it in a non-partisan manner. Because I believe from the other thread I started on parenting, that we are all essentially good decent folk here. This my nation better, or your nation as bad if not worse, is really pretty inane and petty.

After all, if people here cast aspersions on the motivations of Indian media (reporting a US White House report) or Indians here in bringing this to our notice, then reciprocally it would be more than a little surprising to not have the presence of some of the more outraged critics from the other thread here and commenting equally unbiasedly well into the 3rd page of this thread. Would it not? Hope you appreciate I'm calling it as I see it.

I travel a lot, I have many great friends from the West who have come home, met my family, had dinner, and so have I at their places, and personally I believe that most lay folk are fundamentally decent. Yes, there are cliches to be pandered to, perceived affronts to be reacted to, and the Net does give many the cloak of anonymity to say things they would never say in person to someone from the other side face to face. But when you do Google searches and find many posts fom forums such as WAB, some of them your own, you do realise that what you write, till and if its deleted, does stay on in the Net for others to look at, and sometimes you get the impression that one would like to leave a better virtual legacy behind that that for others to read and see and have their perceptions colored by.


It is a huge problem indeed.

If the statistic is even close, a ballpark at best, its massive.


It is hard to be certain about that. 'Under-reporting' when applied to police reports is undoubtedly correct. People usually arrive at that conclusion by pointing to surveys like this.

One would then like to see what the questions were, how were they put across and understood, what the cultural background was to defining rape (vs legal), and what if any would the motivations be for misreporting (agenda?) vs lying/exagerrating (on part of the respondents).


Most rapes are 'he said/she said'. There isn't always physical evidence, either because it isn't there, or because the rape isn't reported. Worse, an overwhelming majority of rapes & sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone known to the victim. I knew a girl whose ex-boyfriend forced her to have sex the week after they broke up. He was in a poor mental state & attempted suicide a while later. She sat with him for days & they kept in contact for years later. It would never have occurred to her to report him, but she would have qualified as being raped under this survey. So would women whose husbands or boyfriends forced them to have sex when they objected. In many parts of the world there is no concept of rape in marriage and even in our society I am betting many wives would not report some instances that would qualify as rape. Changing attitudes to what 'rape' means increases the possible number of situations where it might occur.

Well put. Exactly what I meant above by the "cultural" aspect. Regardless of how individual laws are framed in individual countries, it is my belief that fundamentally all women (as all men) are the same, regardless of their race or color or nationality or faith. A woman KNOWS when she is being raped. She does not need to be a lawyer and understand the finer nuances of complicatedly worded definitions, clauses, and statutes, to realize that what is happening (or happened) to her is rape. Whether or not she goes ahead and reports it or acts on it legally is a whole different ballgame. But in a survey, where identities are anonymous and confidentiality assured, the only reason she would misreport this would be if she is deliberately falsifying it (motive? what is to be gained?) or if she has subconsciously or consciously blanked it out/is living in denial. This would cover both false positives as well as false negatives. Do you have reason to believe such was the case in this report?


No matter how good the police force, the nature of rape means that a lot of women simply don't want to report it. Rape trials are hard & it can often be hard to prove

Remember I asked you in the other thread how the Western police go about a case of rape? You had said there was over years a mch better/humane system in place. Could you help us understand it now so we can probably try to comprehend what practices in other cultures are and from there see what possibly we can do in our own?


If you have a look at how the figure was arrived at the percentage of penetrative rape was a bit over 12%

Remember that this figure is based on a survey. It would be advisable to dig onto precisely how the figures were compiled to be certain what they mean. They may be accurate, they may not. They do indicate that the scale of the problem remains MUCH higher than is acceptable.

Pretty much what I have touched on above. I continue to believe that a woman respondent KNOWS whether she was raped or not. Unless she has something to gain from lying or misreporting on an anonymous survey OR unless you doubt the integrity of data, analysis, or the reporting thereof of the source of this survey (it was originally a White House report), I guess we would need to take the findings at face value or say that we do not buy it based on anecdotal evidence to the contrary (while also understanding the baseline that such would represent).

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 08:37
It doesn't bother to explain how the figures were arrived at or what they represent - of course, that would defeat the purpose of the exercise.

There is simply no way to know just how prevalent rape is. Police reports won't get us anywhere close. Properly conducted surveys are probably more accurate, but that is a measure of relative accuracy, not an absolute statement. The US figure is not dissimilar to the Australian one for 'sexual assault' based on surveys done here. I can certainly think of a number of women I know who have been sexually assaulted in some way, though probably only one who was raped. I'm betting there are others who would never say anything.



I don't think there is much 'wonder' about it. Not only is the appearance of this article about the most predictable news report in history, but the appearance of this thread may rank as the single most predictable moment in WAB history. Is anyone here even a tiny bit surprised by the appearance of the thread or the source?

Rape is one of the most disturbing & serious crimes imaginable. To see it used in an attempt at a 'square up' based on some misguided sense of nationalism can only be described as pathetic. That it was so obviously going to happen simply reinforces that description.

This should save some time on the next thread:

Rape & Sexual Assault in Australia (http://www.aifs.gov.au/acssa/statistics.html)

What a cluster fuck propagandist you have become. Your pre-emption to defend you own sins is assholeization of your own moral high arguments. This pre-emption aka assholization is not new, you did the same by predicting Indian reaction if USA will award diplomatic immunity to Mrs Deveyani K.

Since you can moan longer on threads doesn't mean that you be able to impress other than those who are on your side of the gang.

You dumb missionary, by posting an Australian link you have made me glad that now you will be scared of your own shadows. You are predicting shit here, I already posted my concerns many weeks ago with test run, that if thread like rapes are going to be entertained then more will be posted. You want to predict my reaction ? Huh...it will take you two university degrees plus 8 years CPD to predict me and it will take you two lives to even manage to pay the fee I have already paid with no loan left.


........

The report was first published by 'independent' (UK) newspaper in 2011 with same headlines. What NDTV has mentioned is recent Whitehouse activity raising concerns and referring to that same report in that activity.

ambidex
24 Jan 14,, 08:53
Of course they are but within context here, the analogy is a difference between a drunken brawl and murder.

But in the context of colleges? Understandable while still not acceptable. A bunch of young boys and girls at a party drunk out of their minds. Tell me that groping is not going on AND not all of it are the boys' fault.

Sir, No where in that report any reference has been made on those youth illicit behaviours.

My point was the law in USA is uncompromising and the sections are same. If law doesn't do the distinction then who are we? Why Instead of picking baseball bat in indignation we should go in details of all reported sexual assaults to the level of penetration or no penetration, in this case ?

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 09:35
Rapes happen everywhere, that's not the issue. But this report (which is a US one by the way, so I do not see the need to come down on the suspected motivations of either the Indian news agency or the Indian WABber - or is it WABbit - in reporting such. Just as there was no place for suspecting the motivations of Western media or WABbers/WABits when they highlighted similar crimes in developing countries such as India) suggests a magnitude that has taken many here, including me, by surprise. We should discuss it in a non-partisan manner. Because I believe from the other thread I started on parenting, that we are all essentially good decent folk here. This my nation better, or your nation as bad if not worse, is really pretty inane and petty.

After all, if people here cast aspersions on the motivations of Indian media (reporting a US White House report) or Indians here in bringing this to our notice, then reciprocally it would be more than a little surprising to not have the presence of some of the more outraged critics from the other thread here and commenting equally unbiasedly well into the 3rd page of this thread. Would it not? Hope you appreciate I'm calling it as I see it.


The Indian news report & especially this thread have a very specific motivation. Several senior members spotted it straight away & they were right. That doesn't preclude an informed & sensible discussion and there is no reason for the rest of us to sink to the same level, but lets not kid ourselves about what has happened here.


I travel a lot, I have many great friends from the West who have come home, met my family, had dinner, and so have I at their places, and personally I believe that most lay folk are fundamentally decent. Yes, there are cliches to be pandered to, perceived affronts to be reacted to, and the Net does give many the cloak of anonymity to say things they would never say in person to someone from the other side face to face. But when you do Google searches and find many posts fom forums such as WAB, some of them your own, you do realise that what you write, till and if its deleted, does stay on in the Net for others to look at, and sometimes you get the impression that one would like to leave a better virtual legacy behind that that for others to read and see and have their perceptions colored by.


I have met a number of people from WAB over the years & consider them friends. I hope to meet more in the future, as well as people from other boards I post on. I would be happy to meet 95% of the people on WAB & would probably express myself in a similar fashion to what I do online (I'm Australian, we debate robustly :biggrin: ). It will remain one of my great regrets that our dear friend Jay died before I could meet him. My proposed 2015 trip to the US will be missing something that can never be replaced.

I'm sure we would all like to take back things we have said on the net, but overall I'm happy that my contribution to WAB has been worthwhile, constructive & without ulterior motive.


If the statistic is even close, a ballpark at best, its massive.

Indeed it is.


One would then like to see what the questions were, how were they put across and understood, what the cultural background was to defining rape (vs legal), and what if any would the motivations be for misreporting (agenda?) vs lying/exagerrating (on part of the respondents).

If you check the thread you might find that somebody has dug up the questions. The issue here isn't people 'lying'. Despite the attitudes of some men, I personally doubt women lie about sexual assault very often. Even less so in an anonymous survey. The issue is that the questions might be phrased in such a way that women unintentionally misrepresent an experience one way or another. What you ask & how is very important.


Well put. Exactly what I meant above by the "cultural" aspect. Regardless of how individual laws are framed in individual countries, it is my belief that fundamentally all women (as all men) are the same, regardless of their race or color or nationality or faith. A woman KNOWS when she is being raped. She does not need to be a lawyer and understand the finer nuances of complicatedly worded definitions, clauses, and statutes, to realize that what is happening (or happened) to her is rape. Whether or not she goes ahead and reports it or acts on it legally is a whole different ballgame.


I'm not sure I have your confidence. If a woman lives in a culture or according to a belief that a husband has a right to her body whenever he desires it and the law reflects that, does she 'know' that when he ignores her repeated refusals & uses a bit of muscle she is being raped? On a different issue, there remains controversy in some Western societies about 'acquaintance rape'. If a woman is too drunk to consent is that rape? What about if she consents & then changes her mind? What about if the guy doesn't wear a condom?

See what I mean. Not so easy. There are some definitions of rape - violent stranger rape, for instance - where there can be no doubt. There are others where the woman may or may not consider it rape no matter what the law says. In addition to being very messy, this all impacts on statistics.


But in a survey, where identities are anonymous and confidentiality assured, the only reason she would misreport this would be if she is deliberately falsifying it (motive? what is to be gained?) or if she has subconsciously or consciously blanked it out/is living in denial. This would cover both false positives as well as false negatives. Do you have reason to believe such was the case in this report?


I think I've covered this already. Tell me if I haven't.


Remember I asked you in the other thread how the Western police go about a case of rape? You had said there was over years a mch better/humane system in place. Could you help us understand it now so we can probably try to comprehend what practices in other cultures are and from there see what possibly we can do in our own?


I think I posted something about it but I don't really want to trawl back through that thread to find it. I'll see if I can dig up more, but you could probably google it as easily as me. I'll see if I can find time over the weekend.


Pretty much what I have touched on above. I continue to believe that a woman respondent KNOWS whether she was raped or not. Unless she has something to gain from lying or misreporting on a survey OR unless you doubt the integrity of data, analysis, or the reporting thereof of the source of this survey (it was originally a White House report), I guess we would need to take the findings at face value or say that we do not buy it based on anecdotal evidence to the contrary (while also understanding the baseline that such would represent).

The White House just used figures from a 2010 CDC Report, so don't attach too much significance to that aspect of it. My issue with the data is simply that I haven't studied the issue deeply enough to put it in context or to know precisely what it means. Nobody here has. I'm not saying it is wrong - it is very possibly correct - I just don't know.

My other point would be that I would be wary about taking it out of the legal & cultural context that produced it. I would be reluctant to even compare this to similar figures from other Western nations without more research than I can be bothered doing (Australian figures appear lower on face value, but I have no idea if that reflects reality). There is an implicit comparison that was very clearly the point of the article (and this thread). it is impossible to make.

dalem
24 Jan 14,, 09:47
1 in 5? Ted Kennedy must've been slowing down in his old age.

-dale

sated buddha
24 Jan 14,, 10:37
The Indian news report & especially this thread have a very specific motivation. Several senior members spotted it straight away & they were right.

Just as equally several Indians spotted and clearly called out very specific motivations about the other thread, which were clarified/refuted by the OP. In the end, they are perceptions and opinions. Accusations and refutals. There is really no way you can definitively say one is right or not short of being in the other person's mind. I think if we took that thread in the right context and continued debating it at length, there should be no reason to give this thread any less attention. Otherwise it could be perceived as double standards. Which is never good for healthy debate, on level playing fields.


That doesn't preclude an informed & sensible discussion and there is no reason for the rest of us to sink to the same level, but lets not kid ourselves about what has happened here.

I agree. Am happy to have a ready and able ally in you for that. And can assure you of the same.


I'm sure we would all like to take back things we have said on the net, but overall I'm happy that my contribution to WAB has been worthwhile, constructive & without ulterior motive.

Personally in my short stay here, I have not seen anything to the contrary.


If you check the thread you might find that somebody has dug up the questions. The issue here isn't people 'lying'. Despite the attitudes of some men, I personally doubt women lie about sexual assault very often. Even less so in an anonymous survey. The issue is that the questions might be phrased in such a way that women unintentionally misrepresent an experience one way or another. What you ask & how is very important.

I need to check again then. I did not see the actual questions anywhere. We are on the same page here otherwise. There is really no scenario where one could see a woman being economical with the truth. It could be a cultural understanding of what rape is, and the inherent thresholds thereof. For example, a Western woman may not react the same way at her bottom being slapped or pinched as an Asian woman would. Just as an Asian woman would not react in the same way to someone invading her personal space in a bus or metro as a Western woman would. However, that said, a survey designed and administered by the CDC, an American agency, to American woman, should not normally be prey to cultural and perceptional inconsistencies or ambiguities of understanding and response. Yes you may get SOME skew in the data based on how the questions are structured or put across or understood, but it is a stretch to imagine that CDC would get it so wrong as to skew the entire data set holistically. Or that all women surveyed would have the same issues of perception and response. So assuming all of the above, the findings could be off, the degrees could be debated, but the efforts could equally be better employed in introspecting and finding a solution. Because something is serious dysfunctional otherwise if 1 out of ever 5 women in your society are getting raped. There should be outrage directed inwards.


I'm not sure I have your confidence. If a woman lives in a culture or according to a belief that a husband has a right to her body whenever he desires it and the law reflects that, does she 'know' that when he ignores her repeated refusals & uses a bit of muscle she is being raped?

She still knows she is being raped. She is just conditioned to accept it and moving on with her life, because the alternative is not something that's going to better her existence. On an anonymous survey though, nothing stops her from saying she was raped.


On a different issue, there remains controversy in some Western societies about 'acquaintance rape'. If a woman is too drunk to consent is that rape? What about if she consents & then changes her mind? What about if the guy doesn't wear a condom?

See what I mean. Not so easy. There are some definitions of rape - violent stranger rape, for instance - where there can be no doubt. There are others where the woman may or may not consider it rape no matter what the law says. In addition to being very messy, this all impacts on statistics.

A woman knows when she is raped. They have instincts better honed and far stronger than ours. And they are better tuned to the more subtly couched sexual cues as well. They need to be. Its both an evolutionary protective as well as procreative primal instinct.


I think I posted something about it but I don't really want to trawl back through that thread to find it. I'll see if I can dig up more, but you could probably google it as easily as me. I'll see if I can find time over the weekend.

I must have missed it.


The White House just used figures from a 2010 CDC Report, so don't attach too much significance to that aspect of it.

The CDC is a federal body much like our DBT, CDL, and ICMR. Tasked by the federal governement, and acting and speaking on behalf of the federal governement, on national issues and functions they are tasked with handling. I think the White House quoting a CDC report is therefore official American speak on an American issue. A serious American issue. Pretty significant the way I see it.


My issue with the data is simply that I haven't studied the issue deeply enough to put it in context or to know precisely what it means. Nobody here has. I'm not saying it is wrong - it is very possibly correct - I just don't know.

I agree. But I think we all agree that there is a serious problem here, and it would be better therefore to discuss it than brush it under the carpet or try to question the source or the methods adopted.


My other point would be that I would be wary about taking it out of the legal & cultural context that produced it. I would be reluctant to even compare this to similar figures from other Western nations without more research than I can be bothered doing (Australian figures appear lower on face value, but I have no idea if that reflects reality). There is an implicit comparison that was very clearly the point of the article (and this thread). it is impossible to make.

I agree. This should be debated as purely an issue of serious magnitude in American society and restrain ourselves from drawing parallels to other Western societies, whose dynamics and demographics and circumstances could and probably are very different.

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 12:40
Just as equally several Indians spotted and clearly called out very specific motivations about the other thread, which were clarified/refuted by the OP. In the end, they are perceptions and opinions. Accusations and refutals. There is really no way you can definitively say one is right or not short of being in the other person's mind. I think if we took that thread in the right context and continued debating it at length, there should be no reason to give this thread any less attention. Otherwise it could be perceived as double standards. Which is never good for healthy debate, on level playing fields.


Lets just say I knew that this thread would appear. I've been watching long enough to know what to expect. As we are trying to salvage this thread from the intent of its creation I'll leave it at that.


I agree. Am happy to have a ready and able ally in you for that. And can assure you of the same.


Good


Personally in my short stay here, I have not seen anything to the contrary.

Pleased to hear it.


I need to check again then. I did not see the actual questions anywhere. We are on the same page here otherwise. There is really no scenario where one could see a woman being economical with the truth. It could be a cultural understanding of what rape is, and the inherent thresholds thereof. For example, a Western woman may not react the same way at her bottom being slapped or pinched as an Asian woman would. Just as an Asian woman would not react in the same way to someone invading her personal space in a bus or metro as a Western woman would. However, that said, a survey designed and administered by the CDC, an American agency, to American woman, should not normally be prey to cultural and perceptional inconsistencies or ambiguities of understanding and response. Yes you may get SOME skew in the data based on how the questions are structured or put across or understood, but it is a stretch to imagine that CDC would get it so wrong as to skew the entire data set holistically. Or that all women surveyed would have the same issues of perception and response. So assuming all of the above, the findings could be off, the degrees could be debated, but the efforts could equally be better employed in introspecting and finding a solution. Because something is serious dysfunctional otherwise if 1 out of ever 5 women in your society are getting raped. There should be outrage directed inwards.


Someone linked to a piece earlier on the survey. I'll post some sections.


The agency’s figures are wildly at odds with official crime statistics. The FBI found that 84,767 rapes were reported to law enforcement authorities in 2010. The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey, the gold standard in crime research, reports 188,380 rapes and sexual assaults on females and males in 2010. Granted, not all assaults are reported to authorities. But where did the CDC find 13.7 million victims of sexual crimes that the professional criminologists had overlooked?

I'll get back to the NCV survey in a moment, but fair t o say the gap is dramatic.


Consider: In a telephone survey with a 30 percent response rate, interviewers did not ask participants whether they had been raped. Instead of such straightforward questions, the CDC researchers described a series of sexual encounters and then they determined whether the responses indicated sexual violation. A sample of 9,086 women was asked, for example, “When you were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent, how many people ever had vaginal sex with you?” A majority of the 1.3 million women (61.5 percent) the CDC projected as rape victims in 2010 experienced this sort of “alcohol or drug facilitated penetration.”

What does that mean? If a woman was unconscious or severely incapacitated, everyone would call it rape. But what about sex while inebriated? Few people would say that intoxicated sex alone constitutes rape — indeed, a nontrivial percentage of all customary sexual intercourse, including marital intercourse, probably falls under that definition (and is therefore criminal according to the CDC).

Other survey questions were equally ambiguous. Participants were asked if they had ever had sex because someone pressured them by “telling you lies, making promises about the future they knew were untrue?” All affirmative answers were counted as “sexual violence.” Anyone who consented to sex because a suitor wore her or him down by “repeatedly asking” or “showing they were unhappy” was similarly classified as a victim of violence. The CDC effectively set a stage where each step of physical intimacy required a notarized testament of sober consent.

CDC study on sexual violence in the U.S. overstates the problem - The Washington Post (http://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/cdc-study-on-sexual-violence-in-the-us-overstates-the-problem/2012/01/25/gIQAHRKPWQ_story.html)

Now, the person who wrote the article is herself pushing an ideological barrow, but if she has reported this correctly (big if) then the survey is troubling indeed.

The NCVS mentioned above is a rolling survey of 41,000 households & over 70,000 people. Households are in the survey for a number of years. It therefore has the advantage of a dramatically larger sample size than the CDC survey & longitudinal data for comparison. Unfortunately I don't have a copy of the questions lying around, but they can probably be dug up. These sorts of surveys are used in places like Australia too and are used by governments to gather data for a wide variety of purposes. I don't know how reliable it is, but I would back it against the CDC survey.

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/cv10.pdf



She still knows she is being raped. She is just conditioned to accept it and moving on with her life, because the alternative is not something that's going to better her existence. On an anonymous survey though, nothing stops her from saying she was raped.

A woman knows when she is raped. They have instincts better honed and far stronger than ours. And they are better tuned to the more subtly couched sexual cues as well. They need to be. Its both an evolutionary protective as well as procreative primal instinct.


You are assuming WAY too much. Women can be culturally conditioned just like anybody else. Remember on the other thread where we were talking about women teaching men that some women are 'cheap'? In societies where female genital mutilation is practiced women not only participate frequently, they often insists on it being performed on their daughters. I'm not convinced that women who are culturally conditioned to accept that sex is a duty as part of a subservient marriage, not a pleasure, would necessarily view certain types of rape in the same way as women who are not. I'm not saying they don't, I'm just not assuming. Neither of us are inside their heads.

I am also wary of 'primal instinct' type explanations that aren't backed up by a mountain of solid scientific observation. Too often we read what we want to into such ideas.

In any case, it appears that in this survey it wasn't the women who were questioned who were asked to determine if they had been raped.


I must have missed it.

I'm sure I put something there somewhere, but if you can't find anything give me a shout.


The CDC is a federal body much like our DBT, CDL, and ICMR. Tasked by the federal governement, and acting and speaking on behalf of the federal governement, on national issues and functions they are tasked with handling. I think the White House quoting a CDC report is therefore official American speak on an American issue. A serious American issue. Pretty significant the way I see it.


My point is that the White House simply picked up a report that suited what it wanted to say. It could have used other reports that say something rather different. When it comes to studying & dealing with diseases I would literally trust the CDC with my life. I am less certain on the issue of 'social research'.


I agree. But I think we all agree that there is a serious problem here, and it would be better therefore to discuss it than brush it under the carpet or try to question the source or the methods adopted.


Questioning the quality of the data is not 'brushing under the carpet' it is ensuring that the problem is accurately defined & understood. If you define the problem incorrectly & act on inaccurate & poorly based data you run the risk of not only failing, but of wasting valuable resources while doing it. Someone else also mentioned that overstating the problem can have the effect of diminishing public support for action. Good data isn't optional, its crucial. In this case the data is highly suspect.


I agree. This should be debated as purely an issue of serious magnitude in American society and restrain ourselves from drawing parallels to other Western societies, whose dynamics and demographics and circumstances could and probably are very different.

It is certainly possible to have that discussion, but only on the basis of some solid research. There can be some comparisons made among some societies, but with heavy qualification as to accuracy.

Doktor
24 Jan 14,, 14:06
Guys you have multiple conversations in one post, hard to answer.

My thoughts:

- The intention of the thread. It doesn't matter why the thread was posted. It raises some serious questions. As long as it is a discussion and not an argument, I don't see a problem.

- The data. The questions were shaped that way, we can discuss the questions and methods, but from what I could see it discusses the non-consensual sex. Call it rape or not (depends on the mindset of those who qualify it), it is still non-consensual.

The rest is noise, IMV ;)

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 14:30
The intention of the thread. It doesn't matter why the thread was posted. It raises some serious questions. As long as it is a discussion and not an argument, I don't see a problem.


The intention doesn't preclude a good discussion.


- The data. The questions were shaped that way, we can discuss the questions and methods, but from what I could see it discusses the non-consensual sex. Call it rape or not (depends on the mindset of those who qualify it), it is still non-consensual.


Not if the survey was conducted as reported (note qualifier).


What does that mean? If a woman was unconscious or severely incapacitated, everyone would call it rape. But what about sex while inebriated? Few people would say that intoxicated sex alone constitutes rape — indeed, a nontrivial percentage of all customary sexual intercourse, including marital intercourse, probably falls under that definition (and is therefore criminal according to the CDC).

Other survey questions were equally ambiguous. Participants were asked if they had ever had sex because someone pressured them by “telling you lies, making promises about the future they knew were untrue?” All affirmative answers were counted as “sexual violence.” Anyone who consented to sex because a suitor wore her or him down by “repeatedly asking” or “showing they were unhappy” was similarly classified as a victim of violence.

I wouldn't classify any of that as 'non-consensual'. If the woman was too drunk to consent? sure. The rest? Ever had sex after a few too many drinks? Virtually every male I know has done that. Rape victims all? Lying or repeatedly asking? Rape or sexual violence? I wonder how many men have been 'victims' of 'sexual violence' as a result of that?

If this article is correct the survey is basically junk. If the people conducting the survey got to define 'rape' instead of getting the subjects to do it then it is of little worth. its figures may be 100% correct for all we know (though other data would seem to suggest otherwise), but based on what we know about the survey we can't reach that conclusion based on its data.


The rest is noise, IMV ;)

Its WAB. Come for the discussion, get the noise for free. ;)

Doktor
24 Jan 14,, 14:39
The intention doesn't preclude a good discussion.
We know better and can avoid it or engage in it. I see no issue with the discussion so far. Not many flames like in the Indian thread on the similar topic.



I wouldn't classify any of that as 'non-consensual'. If the woman was too drunk to consent? sure. The rest? Ever had sex after a few too many drinks? Virtually every male I know has done that. Rape victims all? Lying or repeatedly asking? Rape or sexual violence? I wonder how many men have been 'victims' of 'sexual violence' as a result of that?
Wanna try that reasoning at court?


If this article is correct the survey is basically junk. If the people conducting the survey got to define 'rape' instead of getting the subjects to do it then it is of little worth. its figures may be 100% correct for all we know (though other data would seem to suggest otherwise), but based on what we know about the survey we can't reach that conclusion based on its data.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA


Its WAB. Come for the discussion, get the noise for free. ;)
C'mon, the noise here is much, much better then in other places ;)

Bigfella
24 Jan 14,, 14:55
One of my favourite scenes from one of the best TV shows ever made. Having spent many years conducting surveys & working in the industry that produces them for a living I am always wary about taking the mat face value.

Dreadnought
24 Jan 14,, 15:21
Sir, the one you have linked in, is a separate report/issue.

Yes, it is a different one. In order to view the Inquireer you have to have an online subscription. I get it at home.

BUT, What I will do in the spirit of honest references is I will take a pic and post it.;)

Doktor
24 Jan 14,, 15:30
BUT, What I will do in the spirit of honest references is I will take a pic and post it.;)

Double-check the photo before uploading it. :matrix: Just saying.

GVChamp
25 Jan 14,, 04:37
As I said in the thread about education, always consider context. A few years ago, the administration rolled out its "preponderance of the evidence" standard. What this essentially means is that if a student accuses another student of engaging in sexual assault, they must not make any presumption of innocence, but go by what the bulk of evidence as said. There is NO set standard of "evidence."
The kicker is the subtle threat to declare all colleges who do not use this standard as in violation of Title IX.
They also strongly oppose "cross-examination." Too traumatizing.
This has led to interesting cases such as that of Joshua Strange. A Grand Jury failed to indict him with a very, very loose standard of guilt, yet the university dismissed him, almost summarily. Strange sued the school and the case is pending, IIRC.

Going further beyond, the administration has advised campuses to ban all speech that might make someone feel uncomfortable, even if a REASONABLE person would not consider it offensive. Officer of Engineers, I think you are smart. I could not be fired for sexual harassment based on that: no reasonable person would conclude it is sexual harassment. The administration has advised universities to abandon this. By advise, I mean they are threatening to cut off funding from schools that do not ban such speech. I doubt they have cut off federal funding yet, but it is still ominous. The federal government "approved" the University of Montana's new policy, which eliminated the reasonable person altogether.

I've seen these states before. I've seen the criticisms of them before, too. This looks like it will go over about as well as health care reform.

Full disclosure: In college I was (falsely) accused of molesting a girl. I did not learn about it until years later. As I am sexually conservative and never got seriously involved with any girl besides the one in my avatar, there were multiple witnesses in the room (all sober), the girls were talking lots of pictures of everything because I don't know why, etc, she seemed to lose any idea of actually pressing charges and instead just spread rumors behind my back.
Apparently no one bothered to mention it because it seemed ridiculous on its face. At the time I didn't even drink or jaywalk or kiss girls outside a relationship.

sated buddha
25 Jan 14,, 19:21
Lets just say I knew that this thread would appear. I've been watching long enough to know what to expect. As we are trying to salvage this thread from the intent of its creation I'll leave it at that.

I'd be glad to leave it at that too. Not been here anywhere close to as long as you or others have, but even as a fresh set of eyes, some of the viewpoints on the other thread did come across as less than constructive and colored by bias themselves. Its really not that difficult to make out even without the bolster of prior observation or experience.


Women can be culturally conditioned just like anybody else. Remember on the other thread where we were talking about women teaching men that some women are 'cheap'? In societies where female genital mutilation is practiced women not only participate frequently, they often insists on it being performed on their daughters. I'm not convinced that women who are culturally conditioned to accept that sex is a duty as part of a subservient marriage, not a pleasure, would necessarily view certain types of rape in the same way as women who are not. I'm not saying they don't, I'm just not assuming. Neither of us are inside their heads.

Laws made by societies reflect the social mores and values of the society and are not divorced from the people they are intended for nor exist in a social vacuum. If a society believes that conjugal sex is the right of a married man, and the laws do not recognize rape within marriage, then that's what is congruent for that society, and how members of that society live and engage with each other. Similarly female circumcision (or genital mutilation depending on the degree it is taken to). That does not mean a wife who gives herself up to her husband regardless of her mood, will conceivably view any form of non consensual extramarital intercourse in any way different to a woman from a society which recognizes the concept of conjugal rape. I am at a total loss to understand that point you made here.


In any case, it appears that in this survey it wasn't the women who were questioned who were asked to determine if they had been raped.

That's a pertinent point. Algorithmic extrapolations and conclusions are very different from direct questions and answers. But equally, in light of the legal versus social perceptional gulf there will always be in such matters (be it in the US or India or Australia or anywhere else), maybe it was CDC's intention to derive how much of what was legally "rape" in the US was not getting reported because as you said the women per socially programmed to not really consider it as rape. Is it common to have vaginal penetration at a college party when you're passed out? I don't know. You would be fuzzy the next morning though you realize that someone has been inside you. But who? Knowing college parties, and alcohol and drug induced blackouts, its rarely possible to know. Is it rape? Legally yes. Will it be reported? Most probably not. Life goes on, the girl puts it behind her, and is hopefully more careful, alert, and in control the next time. There is a degree of denial involved, a degree of self rationalization. It really could not have been rape, could it? Naaah. And then CDC quizzes her .....

The other point about lies and false promises. While lying about one's marital status or promising/leading on a person to marriage are tactics as old as mankind to get into a girl's pants, it is equally true today that such blanket laws are being heavily misused at least here in India to victimize and get back at men by vengeful/gold digging women in order to take revenge or get compensation or for political gain. It is ridiculously easy and common for a girl to go to the police and claim that xyz promised her marriage and on that pretext had sex with her for abc number of months (during which she was totally quiet) but now that he has reneged on the "deal" she screams "rape."


My point is that the White House simply picked up a report that suited what it wanted to say. It could have used other reports that say something rather different. When it comes to studying & dealing with diseases I would literally trust the CDC with my life. I am less certain on the issue of 'social research'.

Why doubt the motives of the White House and the CDC, and give more credence to other sources that show different? How do you know for certain its the White House that has an agenda? How do you know that its not those who show things are good and normal that do not have an agenda in pushing things under the carpet instead? It works both ways you know, this argument.


Questioning the quality of the data is not 'brushing under the carpet' it is ensuring that the problem is accurately defined & understood. If you define the problem incorrectly & act on inaccurate & poorly based data you run the risk of not only failing, but of wasting valuable resources while doing it. Someone else also mentioned that overstating the problem can have the effect of diminishing public support for action. Good data isn't optional, its crucial. In this case the data is highly suspect.

Up till now all we have is one woman's opinion on why CDC went wrong and how. With a sample of two types of questions from the survey, and a pointed insinuation on how the numbers simply do not match. We have neither an idea of the entire list of questions and methods of this survey, nor the "looking better" NCV survey as comparison. The numbers could be so far of the mark simply because a lot of women do not either report their rapes, or do not for one reason or the other recognize that they were legally raped, as discussed above. It might be that its not American society that has gone downhill or become dysfunctional, but that American laws have gotten much tighter (and in some cases unreasonably/illogically so). We need to dig deeper and weigh both sides. I would be wary of the attraction of attacking the messenger rather than first trying to understand the message.