Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

One in five women raped in US: report

Collapse
This topic is closed.
X
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    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.
    Removing a single turd from the cesspool doesn't make any difference.

    Comment


    • #32
      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.
      Last edited by sated buddha; 24 Jan 14,, 06:20.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by Albany Rifles View Post
        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
        sigpic

        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by sated buddha View Post
          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.
          sigpic

          Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
            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).
            Last edited by sated buddha; 24 Jan 14,, 09:05.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
              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
              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.
              Last edited by ambidex; 24 Jan 14,, 08:40.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Officer of Engineers View Post
                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 ?

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by sated buddha View Post
                  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 ). 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.
                  Last edited by Bigfella; 24 Jan 14,, 09:59.
                  sigpic

                  Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    1 in 5? Ted Kennedy must've been slowing down in his old age.

                    -dale

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                      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.
                      Last edited by sated buddha; 24 Jan 14,, 10:51.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by sated buddha View Post
                        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

                        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.
                        sigpic

                        Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          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 ;)
                          No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                          To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by Doktor View Post
                            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. ;)
                            sigpic

                            Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by Bigfella View Post
                              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.


                              Its WAB. Come for the discussion, get the noise for free. ;)
                              C'mon, the noise here is much, much better then in other places ;)
                              No such thing as a good tax - Churchill

                              To make mistakes is human. To blame someone else for your mistake, is strategic.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                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.
                                sigpic

                                Win nervously lose tragically - Reds C C

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X