Feminism

LeeHoffmann

Just want to make clear I was not trying to misunderstand you (strawman etc). 'The majority of womens groups do nothing to support lesbians - it seems to be quite the opposite [i.e. they oppose them] in areas like domestic violence...In fact, any violence/abuse by women/females on other women/females is neither recognised or publicised'. Can you see why I thought you meant that DV in lesbian relationshps is under-publicised because womens groups oppose lesbians?

If its the same dog-different hair then thats just semantics.

I don't think so. If 2 people are for equal rights but a particular term is preventing dialogue between them, then using a new term with a meaning that they can both agree on could facilitate dialogue again. e.g. X thinks feminism means equality for all genders, Y thinks feminism means the movement to oppress or subjugate men or give extra rights to women. Both X and Y believe there should be equality between the sexes. A discussion on feminism is inevitably going to lead to antagonism and miscommunication in this instance. If they can use a new term to work together then that would be useful.

By egalitarian it would need a shift in attitude from the chivalry that is percieved within the system by men.

It would be egalitarian, that would mean no special favours to anybody.

And its not just gender equality, its family & orientation too.

What do you mean here? family equality?? sexual orientation can be seen as a type of gender too (not by me). Bringing LGBT rights under a term like gender orientation doesn't seem too problematic to me.

So are we talking about men as oppressors and the redistribution of wealth etc.
And of course, what model is used in public policy in Ireland.

We've been here before. I've already told you what I'm talking about.

Thanks for that link btw.:) Interesting reading. I didn't know that emotional abuse alone could be considered DV

CDfm

LeeHoffmann wrote: »

Can you see why I thought you meant that DV in lesbian relationshps is under-publicised because womens groups oppose lesbians?

Not really. Then I don't do the whole oppose thang.

When I posted the answer to Eric Cartman's comment I probably over replied.

(Let me tell you about dating when you have lesbian friends -nobody is good enough )

I don't think so. If 2 people are for equal rights but a particular term is preventing dialogue between them,....... If they can use a new term to work together then that would be useful.

Feminism is just a word -it is the values behind the changes that interest me too.

It would be egalitarian, that would mean no special favours to anybody.

What do you mean here? family equality?? sexual orientation can be seen as a type of gender too (not by me). Bringing LGBT rights under a term like gender orientation doesn't seem too problematic to me.

We've been here before. I've already told you what I'm talking about.

Yup -its got to be inclusive and when we talk stuff like this there is no right or wrong.


The definitions of families have changed.

http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/health/2011/0118/1224287749988.html

I cant see how the problems outlined are specific to lesbians but are the same for any biological parent and non-bio partner.

My OH & my kids had to adjust so I can't see why I would not be supportive of others finding themselves in a similar situation.

Does it confuse you what our government/public are policies on family breakdown are as it confuses me.

When we had a society where the man goes to work and woman stays at home you had a different society. Nowadays -men do everything as well except giving birth and breastfeeding. Cos society has changed and men can.

We may hit a situation where the EU/IMF force changes to our welfare system and the stay at home Mom model.

Should we have policies like social housing for divorced/seperated Dads ?

Thanks for that link btw.:) Interesting reading. I didn't know that emotional abuse alone could be considered DV

It depends on its severity.People who grow up in a domestic violence environment whatever their gender or orientation are more likely to abuse as partners or parents.

Its a socially learned thing mostly and dv is not biological so its passed down thru families.

The Duke - John Wayne was on the recieving end



Here are other links you may like.

http://www.csulb.edu/~mfiebert/assault.htm

http://divorcesupport.about.com/od/abusiverelationships/a/male_abuse.htm

CDfm

Bottle_of_Smoke wrote: »

So marxist feminism is just marxism really then?

It could be.I don't know.

I would like to know the philosophy behind some of the public policies that we have and those of the policymakers that make them.

People often forget that originally Marx was an economist and very talented, he dabled in political science,which is not really science but an ideology. His central belief was that capitalism was wrong etc.

You would think that policymakers would have a blueprint for what they want society to be like, be they women's groups, civil servants or politicians.

A policy usually has objectives -begining ,middle and end.

I don't know.

Ms.Odgeynist

CDfm wrote: »

It could be.I don't know.

I would like to know the philosophy behind some of the public policies that we have and those of the policymakers that make them.

People often forget that originally Marx was an economist and very talented, he dabled in political science,which is not really science but an ideology. His central belief was that capitalism was wrong etc.

You would think that policymakers would have a blueprint for what they want society to be like, be they women's groups, civil servants or politicians.

A policy usually has objectives -begining ,middle and end.

I don't know.

I would think that policies aim to adapt to society, and not vice versa.

CDfm

Ms.Odgeynist wrote: »

I would think that policies aim to adapt to society, and not vice versa.

I would have thought a policy like say same sex marriage is a change in society and it is society that adapts and changes.

So the philosophy behind the policy is important.

I just googled capitalist feminism and here are the results

http://www.google.ie/search?q=capitalist%20feminism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np

Lots of the analysis is fairly radical.

Ms.Odgeynist

CDfm wrote: »

I would have thought a policy like say same sex marriage is a change in society and it is society that adapts and changes.

So the philosophy behind the policy is important.

I just googled capitalist feminism and here are the results

http://www.google.ie/search?q=capitalist%20feminism&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a&source=hp&channel=np

Lots of the analysis is fairly radical.

I'm probably nitpicking but I would have said same sex marriage/civil partnership policy was drawn up due to a demand within society.

That is nitpicking!!

CDfm

Ms.Odgeynist wrote: »

I'm probably nitpicking but I would have said same sex marriage/civil partnership policy was drawn up due to a demand within society.

But it is the collective that decides how to allocate scarce resourses and the hierarchy so a society has a particular order.

A minority may not have a right to call on those resourses or someone lower down the pecking order may not be allowed the resourses

So the demand may be there but the group may decide to dictate how the resourses are allocated.

It may not allow "gay" adoption to discourage "gay" led families.

It may allow joint custody for divorced or seperated males but transfer assets therefore making it impossible to exercise the right.

It may not allocate resourses to LGBT or male DV victims.

Or women may not be jailed due to the absence of jail places.

So supply or resourses do not nesscesarily follow demand as the resourses are limited not unlimited.

Therefore the ideology is very important in weighing up the implementation of public policy as the legal rights may be fraustrated by "unwritten" beliefs or hierarchy.

CDfm

Well I think I have managed to kill this thread off.

I can see Otis pm'ing me next time feminism pops up in TGC " ah go on -post just like you did last time -so I can be the good guy. Puleeeeeeease ":pac:

Owner

Research from the states.

Men are the overwhelming majority of rape victims.

Male rape has been called "The most closely guarded secret of American prisons." (Weiss and Friar 1974)

There are estimated to be over 300,000 male rapes per year in American prisons and jails.

Meanwhile A United Nations statistical report compiled from government sources showed that more than 250,000 cases of male-female rape or attempted rape were recorded by police annually. The reported data covered 65 countries.

According to the 2009 United States National Crime Victimization Survey estimates, only 55% of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials. When a male is raped, less than 10% are believed to be reported. Female-male and female-female rape are ignored altogether in this survey.

Other facts regarding men and rape:

* 2.1% of men reported forced vaginal sex compared to 1.6% of women in a relationship in the previous year. From: Predictors of Sexual Coersion. http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID45-PR45.pdf

*94% of sexually abused youth in correctional facilities reported being abused by female staff. From: Sexual Victimization in Juvenile Facilities, 2008-09. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svjfry09.pdf

* Among inmates reporting staff sexual misconduct, ~ 65% reported a female aggressor. From: Sexual Victimization in Prisons and Jails Reported by Inmates, 2008-09. http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/svpjri0809.pdf

* 50% of homeless youth reported being sexually abused by a female. From: It’s Not What You Think: Sexually Exploited Youth in British Columbia. http://www.nursing.ubc.ca/PDFs/ItsNotWhatYouThink.pdf


And Europe

Men's Reports of Nonconsensual Sexual Interactions with Women: Prevalence and Impact
Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
Published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior

Two studies examined the prevalence and emotional impact of men's nonconsensual sexual interactions with women. The first study included a sample of 247 heterosexual men with a mean age of 18.3 years. The second study was a replication with a sample of 153 heterosexual men with a mean age of 22.3 years. All respondents completed a measure of nonconsensual sexual interactions including the use of three aggressive strategies (physical force, exploitation of the man's incapacitated state, and verbal pressure) and three forms of unwanted sexual contact (kissing/petting, sexual intercourse, and oral sex). In addition, the relationship to the female initiator was explored. For each type of nonconsensual sexual interaction, respondents indicated the affective impact of the experience. In Study 1, 25.1% of respondents reported at least one incident of nonconsensual sex with a woman and 23.9% reported attempts by women to make them engage in nonconsensual sexual activity. In Study 2, the overall prevalence rate for completed nonconsensual sexual interactions was 30.1%, and 23.5% of the men reported attempts at making them engage in nonconsensual sex. In both samples, exploiting the man's inability to offer resistance was the most frequently reported aggressive strategy. Kissing/petting was the most frequently reported unwanted sexual activity, followed by sexual intercourse and oral sex. Prevalence rates were higher for nonconsensual sex with an (ex-)partner or friend than for nonconsensual sex with an unknown women. Ratings of affective impact revealed that men rated their nonconsensual experiences as moderately upsetting. The findings are discussed in the light of previous studies on men's unwanted sexual experiences and the extant literature on women's nonconsensual sexual interactions with men.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t88035m5295g6751/

CDfm

Owner wrote: »

Research from the states.

Men are the overwhelming majority of rape victims.

Male rape has been called "The most closely guarded secret of American prisons." (Weiss and Friar 1974)

I think on these issues that if you have sources for the UK or Ireland they can help.Though , it is often the case that the research has not been carried out.

Esther Rantzen did a piece a few years back on it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/09/boys-sexual-abuse-childline

Owner

CDfm wrote: »

I think on these issues that if you have sources for the UK or Ireland they can help.Though , it is often the case that the research has not been carried out.

Esther Rantzen did a piece a few years back on it

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2009/nov/09/boys-sexual-abuse-childline

Well the research as you say, hasn't been carried out here.

Using research from the states, and Europe is much more reliable than unsubstantiated feminist factoids like 90% or rape victims are women"

As well as the feminist claims being substantiated and debunked on other countries, the false reporting rate by women is likely very high.

"As a serving policeman, there are several things I am not allowed to talk about.

There are plenty of operational secrets we cannot discuss, but I’m not referring to those. I’m talking about the taboo subjects. The ‘detection’ rate for rape is one of these.

It’s very frustrating to sit and listen to pundits talking about the low number of rape convictions in Court, when as police officers we all know what lies behind these poor numbers.

For example, I couldn’t possibly tell you that out of every ten rapes which are reported in Ruraltown, at least eight turn out to be nonsense. To be fair, eight out of ten of everything reported at Ruraltown police station is nonsense, why should rape be any different?

I couldn’t tell you that of the remaining two, an existing alcohol-fuelled chaotic drug-based relationship is a factor in at least one of these, and ‘consent’ is probably present in the other to some degree. In my whole service I can only recall three stranger rapes and a half a dozen where consent was withdrawn at the time and he carried on. But I can’t tell you that.

I can’t tell you that most of the adult rapes reported in Ruraltown represent either the latest in a series of allegations designed to score points against an ‘ex, lies designed to fend off an angry parent when a curfew has been missed or a defence mechanism when a jilted ‘partner’ discovers an infidelity."

http://inspectorgadget.wordpress.com/2011/05/19/when-is-a-rape-not-a-rape-shock/

CDfm

I see the piece you quote and I dont know how rape statistics are compiled but I can say that in all research you do get researcher bias, and, I have no idea how that would translate to actual crime stats in Ireland .

So the measurements used are a factor and also the basis on how "false allegations" are treated. Are they prosecuted. A woman with a son who is falsely accused as a member of society has a vested interest too in seeing "false accusations" prosecuted.

I do know that when we discussed the ISPCC campaign least Xmas a fair few women posted saying they had been abused by females growing up.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056130796

So you will get a difference between info put out by interest groups who may be biased of have a gender agenda kind of like a political issue and those who are not biased.

Most people are open minded and rape is an awful violent crime and every allegation should be properly investigated on account of its seriousness.

Maguined

Owner wrote: »

As well as the feminist claims being substantiated and debunked on other countries, the false reporting rate by women is likely very high.

While I agree with your points that male rape is rarely ever studied in great detail and some feminist organisations have offered up dodgy calculations of rape statistics I really think making a claim that false reporting rate by women is likely very high to be pretty bad.

One report on one town is not enough to be making such a strong allegation and is basically indulging in the sort of statistical hocus pocus that you complained about feminist groups making so it's a bit hypocritical.

Owner

Maguined wrote: »

While I agree with your points that male rape is rarely ever studied in great detail and some feminist organisations have offered up dodgy calculations of rape statistics I really think making a claim that false reporting rate by women is likely very high to be pretty bad.

One report on one town is not enough to be making such a strong allegation and is basically indulging in the sort of statistical hocus pocus that you complained about feminist groups making so it's a bit hypocritical.

If I was offering stats on false rape claims I would have offered these -

"A review of 556 rape accusations filed against Air Force personnel found that 27% of women later recanted. Then 25 criteria were developed based on the profile of those women, and then submitted to three independent reviewers to review the remaining cases. If all three reviewers deemed the allegation was false, it was categorized as false. As a result, 60% of all allegations were found to be false.1 Of those women who later recanted, many didn't admit the allegation was false until just before taking a polygraph test. Others admitted it was false only after having failed a polygraph test.2
In a nine-year study of 109 rapes reported to the police in a Midwestern city, Purdue sociologist Eugene J. Kanin reported that in 41% of the cases the complainants eventually admitted that no rape had occurred.3
In a follow-up study of rape claims filed over a three-year period at two large Midwestern universities, Kanin found that of 64 rape cases, 50% turned out to be false.4 Among the false charges, 53% of the women admitted they filed the false claim as an alibi.5
According to a 1996 Department of Justice report, “in about 25% of the sexual assault cases referred to the FBI, ... the primary suspect has been excluded by forensic DNA testing.6 It should be noted that rape involves a forcible and non-consensual act, and a DNA match alone does not prove that rape occurred. So the 25% figure substantially underestimates the true extent of false allegations.
And according to former Colorado prosecutor Craig Silverman, “For 16 years, I was a kick-ass prosecutor who made most of my reputation vigorously prosecuting rapists. ... I was amazed to see all the false rape allegations that were made to the Denver Police Department. ... A command officer in the Denver Police sex assaults unit recently told me he placed the false rape numbers at approximately 45%.”7

According to the FBI, about 95,000 forcible rapes were reported in 2004.8 Based on the statements and studies cited above, some 47,000 American men are falsely accused of rape each year. These men are disproportionately African-American.9

Some of these men are wrongly convicted, sentenced, and imprisoned. Even if there is no conviction, a false allegation of rape can “emotionally, socially, and economically destroy a person.”10





1 McDowell CP. False allegations. Forensic Science Digest, Vol. 11, No. 4, December 1985

2 Ibid.

3 Kanin EJ. An alarming national trend: False rape allegations. Archives of Sexual Behavior, Vol. 23, No. 1, 1994 http://www.sexcriminals.com/library/doc-1002-1.pdf

4 Ibid., p. 2, Kanin reports that in the city studied, "for a declaration of false charge to be made, the complainant must admit that no rape had occurred. ... The police department will not declare a rape charge as false when the complainant, for whatever reason, fails to pursue the charge or cooperate on the case, regardless how much doubt the police may have regarding the validity of the charge. In short, these cases are declared false only because the complainant admitted they are false. ... Thus, the rape complainants referred to in this paper are for completed forcible rapes only. The foregoing leaves us with a certain confidence that cases declared false by this police agency are indeed a reasonable -- if not a minimal -- reflection of false rape allegations made to this agency, especially when one considers that a finding of false allegation is totally dependent upon the recantation of the rape charge."

5 Ibid., Addenda.

6 Connors E, Lundregan T, Miller N, McEwen T. Convicted by juries, exonerated by science: Case studies in the use of DNA evidence to establish innocence after trial. June 1996 http://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/dnaevid.txt

7 http://web.archive.org/web/20050404230831/http://www.thedenverchannel.com/kobebryanttrial/2812198/detail.html

8 Federal Bureau of Investigation. Forcible rape. February 17, 2006. http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html

9 Innocence Project: Facts on post-conviction DNA exonerations. http://www.innocenceproject.org/Content/351.php

10 Angelucci M, Sacks G. Research shows false allegations of rape common. Los Angeles Daily Journal, Sept. 15, 2004. http://www.glennsacks.com/research_shows_false.htm

http://www.mediaradar.org/research_on_false_rape_allegations.php


More here
False rape allegations: an assault on justice
by Bruce Gross
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_go1613/is_1_18/ai_n31607869/

here

Believe Her! The Woman Never Lies Myth
Frank S. Zepezauer*

ABSTRACT: Empirical evidence does not support the widespread belief that women are extremely unlikely to make false accusations of male sexual misconduct. Rather the research on accusations of rape, sexual harassment, incest, and child sexual abuse indicates that false accusations have become a serious problem. The motivations involved in making a false report are widely varied and include confusion, outside influence from therapists and others, habitual lying, advantages in custody disputes, financial gain, and the political ideology of radical feminism.
http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_4.htm



And here is a paper about how feminism falsified its 2% of rape claims are false" claim.

"THE TRUTH BEHIND LEGAL DOMINANCE
FEMINISM’S “TWO PERCENT FALSE
RAPE CLAIM” FIGURE
Edward Greer*
I. INTRODUCTION
For at least the last decade, Legal Dominance Feminism (LDF) 1has been the predominant voice on sexual abuse within legal academia.2 However, many of its empirical claims regarding the sexual
abuse of women are erroneous....

rest here - http://ncfm.org/libraryfiles/Children/rape/greer.pdf

Owner

CDfm wrote: »

I see the piece you quote and I dont know how rape statistics are compiled but I can say that in all research you do get researcher bias, and, I have no idea how that would translate to actual crime stats in Ireland .

So the measurements used are a factor and also the basis on how "false allegations" are treated. Are they prosecuted. A woman with a son who is falsely accused as a member of society has a vested interest too in seeing "false accusations" prosecuted.

I do know that when we discussed the ISPCC campaign least Xmas a fair few women posted saying they had been abused by females growing up.

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2056130796

So you will get a difference between info put out by interest groups who may be biased of have a gender agenda kind of like a political issue and those who are not biased.

Most people are open minded and rape is an awful violent crime and every allegation should be properly investigated on account of its seriousness.

This blog is a pretty good source on hidden sexual abuse of boys. Its not a gendered problem all, as some groups would have us believe.

http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/

CDfm

Owner wrote: »

This blog is a pretty good source on hidden sexual abuse of boys. Its not a gendered problem all, as some groups would have us believe.

http://toysoldier.wordpress.com/

Its a source, but myself I am always a little suspicious of single sex studies and sites that go into the gender war.

What I think is that studies accross the whole population would lead to service delivery accross the whole population.

Same sex studies and service delivery are bound to miss someone -so why would anyone want that ?

Owner

CDfm wrote: »

Its a source, but myself I am always a little suspicious of single sex studies and sites that go into the gender war.

What I think is that studies accross the whole population would lead to service delivery accross the whole population.

Same sex studies and service delivery are bound to miss someone -so why would anyone want that ?

Oh, he has a link to an article about prison rape in in British jails

https://toysoldier.wordpress.com/2010/05/02/prison-rape-ignored-in-britain/

Anyway, the research on the sexual abuse of boys points to 1 in 6 before the age of 18.

You can see studies and methodology here - http://www.jimhopper.com/male-ab/

Owner

Count Duckula

I don't believe that most feminists know what feminism is. Equality is impossible without oppression, outside of numbers, no two things are equal and gender as a social construct, which is Marxist in origin is discredited by science.

I object wholeheartedly to the practice of circulating false hoods about the nature of abuse to further political agendas and using abuse and rape fear mongering to rabble rouse, the use of abuse victims as political capital and the exclusion and protection of victims and abusers respectively that aren't so politically useful.

I believe that men and women should have the same opportunities and be held to the same standards and that feminism runs counter to this and lobbies for a modified sort of chivalry, one that suits todays conditions.

Chivalry 1 - women are weak, men must give them special consideration.
Chivalry 2 (feminism) women are oppressed, state and men give them special consideration.

There are strains of feminism that I do agree with, equity and some conservative feminism, and aspects of most forms of feminism that I agree with but on the whole I reject it as toxic and based on a series of logical fallacies, lies and gyno-centrism - women first, then children, men expendable.

What I see needing to happen is this, the mens movement needs to deconstruct and dismantle feminism, lie by lie, and the two need to be replaced by something new, something thats more humanist and less oppressive and hate based.

Which is pretty much the way the dialectic is supposed to work anyway.

All that said, I would accept any feminist that accepts all the mens rights issues, and doesn't insist that abuse or bad behaviour is gendered, that is the litmus test for me, I suppose.

Stheno

Owner, I fail to see how claiming that on the basis of prison rape men are the majority of rape in the US you can claim that that is indicative of overall society given the particular constraints that prison imposes, once one takes that out as an exception in normal dual gender societies, have you stats on male rape within day to day (non prison) societies in relation to rape?

Owner

Stheno wrote: »

Owner, I fail to see how claiming that on the basis of prison rape men are the majority of rape in the US you can claim that that is indicative of overall society given the particular constraints that prison imposes, once one takes that out as an exception in normal dual gender societies, have you stats on male rape within day to day (non prison) societies in relation to rape?

This is the largest and most comprehensive dual sex study study of its kind.

And it found that women rape men as often as men rape women, the results were roughly one in four for each sex.

Predictors of Sexual Coercion Against Women and Men: A Multilevel, Multinational Study of University Students

Several explanations have been forwarded to account for sexual coercion in romantic relationships. Feminist theory states that sexual coercion is the result of male dominance over women and the need to maintain that dominance; however, studies showing that women sexually coerce men point towards weaknesses in that theory. Some researchers have, therefore, suggested that it is the extent to which people view the other gender as hostile that influences these rates. Furthermore, much research suggests that a history of childhood sexual abuse is a strong risk factor for later sexual victimization in relationships. Few researchers have empirically evaluated the first two explanations and little is known about whether sexual revictimization operates for men or across cultures. In this study, hierarchical linear modeling was used to investigate whether the status of women and adversarial sexual beliefs predicted differences in sexual coercion across 38 sites from around the world, and whether sexual revictimization operated across genders and cultures. Participants included 7,667 university students from 38 sites. Results showed that the relative status of women at each site predicted significant differences in levels of sexual victimization for men, in that the greater the status of women, the higher the level of forced sex against men. In addition, differences in adversarial sexual beliefs across sites significantly predicted both forced and verbal sexual coercion for both genders, such that greater levels of hostility towards women at a site predicted higher levels of forced and verbal coercion against women and greater levels of hostility towards men at a site predicted higher levels of forced and verbal coercion against men. Finally, sexual revictimization occurred for both genders and across all sites, suggesting that sexual revictimization is a cross-gender, cross-cultural phenomenon. Results are discussed in terms of their contributions to the literature, limitations of the current study, and suggestions for future research.

3% of men reported forced sex (of which 2.1% was forced vaginal sex... this is in fact men reporting victimization by women)
22% of men reported verbal sexual coercion

By comparison, in the same study it was found that:
2.3% of women reported forced sex (don't ignore the decimal point)
25% of women reported verbal sexual coercion


----

---

-Men--Women-
Forced sex: almost 3.0% 2.3%
-forced oral/anal sex: 2.4% 1.6%
-forced vaginal sex: 2.1% 1.6%

Verbal Coercion: 22.0% almost 25.0%
- insisted on sex w/o condom 13.5% 11.0%
- insisted on vaginal sex 11.7% 14.7%
- insisted on oral/anal sex 7.5% 8.3%
- threatend into oral/anal sex 1.9% 1.7%
- threatend into vaginal sex 1.9% 1.8%

At least one type of CSA 30.0% 32.0%
http://pubpages.unh.edu/~mas2/ID45-PR45.pdf


One in four men raped by women replicated here

Men's Reports of Nonconsensual Sexual Interactions with Women: Prevalence and Impact
Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Potsdam, Germany
Published in the Archives of Sexual Behavior

Two studies examined the prevalence and emotional impact of men's nonconsensual sexual interactions with women. The first study included a sample of 247 heterosexual men with a mean age of 18.3 years. The second study was a replication with a sample of 153 heterosexual men with a mean age of 22.3 years. All respondents completed a measure of nonconsensual sexual interactions including the use of three aggressive strategies (physical force, exploitation of the man's incapacitated state, and verbal pressure) and three forms of unwanted sexual contact (kissing/petting, sexual intercourse, and oral sex). In addition, the relationship to the female initiator was explored. For each type of nonconsensual sexual interaction, respondents indicated the affective impact of the experience. In Study 1, 25.1% of respondents reported at least one incident of nonconsensual sex with a woman and 23.9% reported attempts by women to make them engage in nonconsensual sexual activity. In Study 2, the overall prevalence rate for completed nonconsensual sexual interactions was 30.1%, and 23.5% of the men reported attempts at making them engage in nonconsensual sex. In both samples, exploiting the man's inability to offer resistance was the most frequently reported aggressive strategy. Kissing/petting was the most frequently reported unwanted sexual activity, followed by sexual intercourse and oral sex. Prevalence rates were higher for nonconsensual sex with an (ex-)partner or friend than for nonconsensual sex with an unknown women. Ratings of affective impact revealed that men rated their nonconsensual experiences as moderately upsetting. The findings are discussed in the light of previous studies on men's unwanted sexual experiences and the extant literature on women's nonconsensual sexual interactions with men.
http://www.springerlink.com/content/t88035m5295g6751/

Another here

Women's Sexual Aggression Against Men: Prevalence and Predictors
Department of Psychology, University of Potsdam, Germany - 2003

In this study, we investigated the prevalence of women's sexual aggression against men and examined predictors of sexual aggression in a sample of 248 women. Respondents reported their use of aggressive strategies (physical force, exploitation of a man's incapacitated state, and verbal pressure) to make a man engage in sexual touch, sexual intercourse, or oral sex against his will. Childhood abuse, gender role orientation, ambiguous communication of sexual intentions, level of sexual activity, and peer pressure were included as predictors of sexual aggression. Almost 1 in 10 respondents (9.3%) reported having used aggressive strategies to coerce a man into sexual activities. Exploitation of the man's incapacitated state was used most frequently (5.6%), followed by verbal pressure (3.2%) and physical force (2%). An additional 5.4% reported attempted acts of sexual aggression. Sexual abuse in childhood, ambiguous communication of sexual intentions, high levels of sexual activity, and peer pressure toward sexual activity were linked to an increased likelihood of sexual aggression
http://www.springerlink.com/content/h4038x61400l8273/?p=f4627938f6ee449bad67bc5f803aebf8



There is more on the previous page.


Anyway, once we see that women are raping men as often as men are women, and we count male on male rape inside and out side prison, we see that men are the majority of victims. Obviously, I'm excluding lesbian sexual violence, but I have no studies on that, its sort of a taboo because its not supposed to exist, according to certain quasi-religious beliefs.


I'll accept counter studies so long as they are not produced by, paid for by or connected to ideological political/womens advocacy groups.

Otis Driftwood

Owner,Im not sure what all the stuff you are posting has to do with the thread topic ie feminism.What you are doing is bordering on soap boxing,something that is frowned upon throughout boards.Copying and pasting links to reems of stuff also borders on soap boxing.If you arent going to post in relation to the topic at hand then dont post in this thread.

Regards,
OD.

Owner

Otis Driftwood wrote: »

Owner,Im not sure what all the stuff you are posting has to do with the thread topic ie feminism.What you are doing is bordering on soap boxing,something that is frowned upon throughout boards.Copying and pasting links to reems of stuff also borders on soap boxing.If you arent going to post in relation to the topic at hand then dont post in this thread.

Regards,
OD.

Ok thanks for the heads up.

btw - I was responding to the 90% of rape victims are female canard that was brought up by the OP.

Otis Driftwood

No problem,it has been more than addressed at this point so lets leave it at that.

Cheers.

CDfm

There should nearly be a rule for this kind of thread about seeing another persons point of view. I always find its better in these types of threads to acknowledge issues where they exist.

I have posted before about how great my lesbian friends were after my divorce .Really, and a lot of my women friends were , but some were not.

Well one of them sent over links to the UCC Fruitbat case before the story broke for me to put it on-line to support Dr Evans

http://www.boards.ie/vbulletin/showthread.php?t=2055914071

She did think the Hunky Dory ads were great too

So when I read threads or post I don't want to take a biased or prejudiced attitude just for the sake of it.

It also prevents other like minded people of both genders and whatever orientation coming in.

Gunsfortoys

I understand that feminism was to garner equal rights in society and I honestly think it has fulfilled its purpose.

As usual though,these types of groups get out of hand and promote their own agenda almost always now and I find it hard to believe that these types of groups are allowed to exist.

There are some openly feminist posters on the forum that post these types of comics that portray all men as evil oppressive chauvinists and they are allowed to post these free of ban or infraction which is a disgrace.

I will never support a single gender organisation and will believe in equal rights always.

TaraFoxglove

Gunsfortoys wrote: »

I understand that feminism was to garner equal rights in society and I honestly think it has fulfilled its purpose.

As usual though,these types of groups get out of hand and promote their own agenda almost always now and I find it hard to believe that these types of groups are allowed to exist.

There are some openly feminist posters on the forum that post these types of comics that portray all men as evil oppressive chauvinists and they are allowed to post these free of ban or infraction which is a disgrace.

I will never support a single gender organisation and will believe in equal rights always.

Most feminists believe in equal rights too.

But sexism still exists today, it's just much more insidious. It has definitely not been eliminated. So there is still a place for feminism to try and achieve equal rights.

CDfm

TaraFoxglove wrote: »

Most feminists believe in equal rights too.

But sexism still exists today, it's just much more insidious. It has definitely not been eliminated.

In what ways and how ?

So there is still a place for feminism to try and achieve equal rights.

What policies do you propose.

And are there examples of where men are the victim or women the perpetrator ?

source

TaraFoxglove wrote: »

Most feminists believe in equal rights too.

But sexism still exists today, it's just much more insidious. It has definitely not been eliminated. So there is still a place for feminism to try and achieve equal rights.

Tara, Feminism fought for equal rights for women. That now exists in this country and all other Western Countries. It is enshrined in both European and Irish law.

If there is "insidious sexism" going on, then I take it you mean employers being sexist towards their employees as opposed to the state taking a sexist view.

In this case, a lobby group does nothing as the legislation already exists to protect a person from being discriminated against on the grounds of sex. In cases where an employer or organisation is being sexist in its approach then you have an avenue of redress by going to the courts. Once your facts are correct then you should win your case.

For this you need a solicitor, not a feminist lobby group.

Feminism has run it's course. It has achieved equal rights for women.

Morag

Feminism isn't only about equal rights, it's also about empowering women to avail of those rights. You have all the rights you want but if the culture/society hinders you from exercising them they are pretty pointless.

Mallei

Sharrow's post above is a more modern definition of feminism, in the western world at least.

Nowadays, if a woman wanted to become a plumber, she has the right to do so. There is nothing legally preventing her from doing so any more, and thus feminism has won in that regard. Yet, she would find extreme resistance to her career path from the established male order, and that is the fight feminism still has.

Another example is a woman who enjoys herself sexually. She is no longer doing anything illegal by using contraception and having sex with different people, but society will judge her for doing so and she'll find herself ostracised where a man wouldn't. This is another fight against societal norms that feminism still has.

Owner

Sharrow wrote: »

Feminism isn't only about equal rights, it's also about empowering women to avail of those rights. You have all the rights you want but if the culture/society hinders you from exercising them they are pretty pointless.

Ok so if women have equal right (we could reasonably argue that women have more rights and choices than men) ... in what ways is the culture or society hindering women from using their equal or extra rights?

Mallei

Owner wrote: »

Ok so if women have equal right (we could reasonably argue that women have more rights and choices than men) ... in what ways is the culture or society hindering women from using their equal or extra rights?

Could we?

Go on then.

Maguined

Mallei wrote: »

Sharrow's post above is a more modern definition of feminism, in the western world at least.

Nowadays, if a woman wanted to become a plumber, she has the right to do so. There is nothing legally preventing her from doing so any more, and thus feminism has won in that regard. Yet, she would find extreme resistance to her career path from the established male order, and that is the fight feminism still has.

Another example is a woman who enjoys herself sexually. She is no longer doing anything illegal by using contraception and having sex with different people, but society will judge her for doing so and she'll find herself ostracised where a man wouldn't. This is another fight against societal norms that feminism still has.

Is that not telling people what to think though? I completely agree with fighting to change laws if those laws are sexist and changing the laws would make things more fair and equal for everyone, but what exactly do you mean by changing societal norms?

Do people not have the right and entitlement to their own opinions if those opinions are not affecting the rights of others? If a man does judge a woman negatively for using contraception he is not doing anything wrong (just by having these beliefs) in my opinion, while I do not agree with him he should be entitled to his beliefs no matter how backward they are to me as he is not directly doing anything wrong to women with these beliefs.

Annasopra

Maguined wrote: »

Is that not telling people what to think though? I completely agree with fighting to change laws if those laws are sexist and changing the laws would make things more fair and equal for everyone, but what exactly do you mean by changing societal norms?

Breaking down structural barriers to women that don't exist in law but in culture

Mallei

Maguined wrote: »

Is that not telling people what to think though? I completely agree with fighting to change laws if those laws are sexist and changing the laws would make things more fair and equal for everyone, but what exactly do you mean by changing societal norms?

Do people not have the right and entitlement to their own opinions if those opinions are not affecting the rights of others? If a man does judge a woman negatively for using contraception he is not doing anything wrong (just by having these beliefs) in my opinion, while I do not agree with him he should be entitled to his beliefs no matter how backward they are to me as he is not directly doing anything wrong to women with these beliefs.

Well, no, quite simply. You need to address society as a whole, because women should be equal to men in every single way. There should be no facet of life where we are considered lesser than males simply owing to our gender. Changing the law is only the start of this process - it merely makes it legal for us to fight for that change. The change is yet to happen. I would say if a woman is villified for "sleeping around", or prevented from being a plumber by the attitudes of a predominantly male workforce, then she is being discriminated against even if not in a legal sense.

Feminism is not just about winning a legal fight to give us the right to do the same things as men; it's about changing the attitudes of those men to stop preventing us taking advantage of those rights.

Maguined

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Breaking down structural barriers to women that don't exist in law but in culture

Mallei wrote: »

Well, no, quite simply. You need to address society as a whole, because women should be equal to men in every single way. There should be no facet of life where we are considered lesser than males simply owing to our gender. Changing the law is only the start of this process - it merely makes it legal for us to fight for that change. The change is yet to happen. I would say if a woman is villified for "sleeping around", or prevented from being a plumber by the attitudes of a predominantly male workforce, then she is being discriminated against even if not in a legal sense.

Feminism is not just about winning a legal fight to give us the right to do the same things as men; it's about changing the attitudes of those men to stop preventing us taking advantage of those rights.

But is this not basically saying people are not entitled to their own personal beliefs, that they have to agree with your own personal moral and ethical code?

Laws exist to be a societies standard of what is and is not acceptable. Being viewed in a positive manner is not a law as it is not demanded by society, I do not believe anyone has the right to demand to be viewed positively. I do not have the right to demand that people think my jokes are funny or that I am a nice person. I do have to right if someone denies me a job opportunity or promotion based on anything other than to do with my work experience but I genuinely do not feel I am discriminated against if a woman or man viewed me as a "slut".

Are you not going to sacrifice freedom of expression to change these societal norms?

Annasopra

Maguined wrote: »

But is this not basically saying people are not entitled to their own personal beliefs, that they have to agree with your own personal moral and ethical code?

Laws exist to be a societies standard of what is and is not acceptable. Being viewed in a positive manner is not a law as it is not demanded by society, I do not believe anyone has the right to demand to be viewed positively. I do not have the right to demand that people think my jokes are funny or that I am a nice person. I do have to right if someone denies me a job opportunity or promotion based on anything other than to do with my work experience but I genuinely do not feel I am discriminated against if a woman or man viewed me as a "slut".

Are you not going to sacrifice freedom of expression to change these societal norms?

But you are looking at this on a very individualised basis of this being about "you" and every other person as a sole individual

I would tend to look at society in a very different way where cultural norms and structures create opportunities for some and exclusion for others.

Society is not simply a collection of individuals

Galvasean

Johnnymcg wrote: »

Society is not simply a collection of individuals

Surely it is that if nothing else?

Maguined

Johnnymcg wrote: »

But you are looking at this on a very individualised basis of this being about "you" and every other person as a sole individual

I would tend to look at society in a very different way where cultural norms and structures create opportunities for some and exclusion for others.

Society is not simply a collection of individuals

Yes I am looking at it from the rights of the individual, not necessarily me specifically but I do believe in freedom of expression and I do believe in the right to have your own personal opinions. I believe your rights as an individual have to suffer for the rights of society as a whole, hence while I believe individual people are entitled to be racist if they so choose I do not believe they are allowed express their racism through denying someone a job opportunity. The same goes for sexism and any other sort of discrimination.

However that is because you are violating another persons human rights, where there is discrimination that is not violating someone else's human rights than I think people are entitled to their own individual personal beliefs no matter how much I might disagree with them. Being viewed negatively because of sleeping around as was suggested as an example is not a violation of someone's human rights. Yes if an employer took action based on this belief then it would be a violation of rights but some random person not in a position of influence having this same opinion would not be a violation of rights in my opinion.

Annasopra

Galvasean wrote: »

Surely it is that if nothing else?

no not at all; definitions of what society is encompass the fact that people organise themselves into groups and also the relations between different groups

Owner

Mallei wrote: »

Could we?

Go on then.

Women have more rights in reproductive and family law, more choice between career or mother-hood or a combination of the two, for example. Outside of that, women and men have the same rights and choices available to them.

Chivalry is still there in the legal system, in health care, victim support and daily life, and so on, and there is a strong chivalry lobby present in the form of modern feminism.

Maguined

Owner wrote: »

Women have more rights in reproductive and family law, more choice between career or mother-hood or a combination of the two, for example. Outside of that, women and men have the same rights and choices available to them.

Chivalry is still there in the legal system, in health care, victim support and daily life, and so on, and there is a strong chivalry lobby present in the form of modern feminism.

I really don't think this sort of choice is a matter of inequality, men are just as free as women to make the choice to stay at home and mind the family, yes it may be more socially acceptable for a woman to stay at home and mind he kids but the choice is still there for men and so I would view this as equal among the genders.

If Bob wants to stay at home and raise his children while his wife goes out to work it really does not directly violate his human rights if his neighbour Sally down the street disapproves of this choice, he is still free to live it.

Count Duckula

Owner wrote: »

more choice between career or mother-hood

Well that's hardly surprising :pac:

Morag

Equal, sure then how a man age 25 with no kids can have his tubes cut/clamped and a woman the same age with no kids can't have her tubes cut/clamped?

Maguined

Sharrow wrote: »

Equal, sure then how a man age 25 with no kids can have his tubes cut/clamped and a woman the same age with no kids can't have her tubes cut/clamped?

That's hardly a fair comparison is it? they are completely different procedures with drastically different risks.

donfers

TaraFoxglove wrote: »

Most feminists believe in equal rights too.

But sexism still exists today, it's just much more insidious. It has definitely not been eliminated. So there is still a place for feminism to try and achieve equal rights.

yes but it's a pretty dumb way that some of them are carrying on in terms of achieving that goal, the media will always highlight the most newsworthy stuff (i.e. the craziest most extreme most radical aspect of it) and I am afraid to say it is not just encouraging a lot of people to not be sympathetic to the overall goal, it is creating a backlash against it with many now actively hostile and that number is growing - basically how some of the feminist campaigners are going about their business is actually exacerbating the divide between the genders AND fostering a feeling of resentment from the mainstream (hence why "feminist" is now considered almost a shameful term by many men and women) - feminism badly needs to be remarketed and rebranded because while it will continue to appeal to a certain demographic at the moment, usually middle-class, well-educated women with staunch victim-obsessed mindsets(justified or not - for the purposes of this post i don't care) and some unfortunately with misandric viewpoints borne out of personal experience or trauma, well what feminism needs is to reach out to more than this narrow demographic, to reach out across the genders and class boundaries and to do this I am afraid it will have to lose the term "feminism" to begin with because it is an inherently divisive and narrowly focused term regardless of the merits or otherwise of focusing on women's rights alone, that is indeed the second point, when it comes to minorities like blacks, the disabled, aids victims etc. etc. yes by all means a narrow collective is necessary but women are not a minority, yes women face some problems and prejudices and discrimination that is specific to women alone but NEWSFLASH so do men (and i don't think the solution for men is run off and form "masculinism" groups, father's rights do this to an extent but again i'd prefer they along with feminists to operate under a more inclusive banner) and often because we live and work together THESE PROBLEMS ARE NOT MUTUALLY EXCLUSIVE, be it fathers rights ot abortion or maternity/paternity leave, IT IS COMMON SENSE TO SOLVE THESE PROBLEMS TOGETHER, if we isolate these problems and focus on them from our own gender perspective alone then we are only going to prolong the gender wars

apologies for lack of paragraphs and use of caps lock in this post

Morag

If an adult does not want to have children and knowing all the risks involved and after counselling wants to have their tubes cut/clamped and wants to pay for it then they should be able to.

Currently men can do this, women can not, they have to wait until they met a criteria laid down by medical policy which mean if you are 25 and have 4 kids, 35 with 2 kids or 40+ with no kids then you can get a referral and start the process which can take 2 years.

Which either means women can't be trusted to make decisions about their own bodies and fertility or we as a society value a woman's fertility more then her right to choose to procreate or not.

Morag

donfers you can be an advocate and be pro equal rights for everyone but you have to acknowledge that different groups face different types of discrimination and prejudice.

Being a feminist means that you acknowledge the discrimination and prejudice women face just due to being women. If you can't do that then you can't set about helping change it.

Maguined

Sharrow wrote: »

If an adult does not want to have children and knowing all the risks involved and after counselling wants to have their tubes cut/clamped and wants to pay for it then they should be able to.

Currently men can do this, women can not, they have to wait until they met a criteria laid down by medical policy which mean if you are 25 and have 4 kids, 35 with 2 kids or 40+ with no kids then you can get a referral and start the process which can take 2 years.

Which either means women can't be trusted to make decisions about their own bodies and fertility or we as a society value a woman's fertility more then her right to choose to procreate or not.

Men can do this because the risk associated with their operation are significantly lower than the operation involved in a woman's. Reversing the procedure on men is also significantly easier than in a woman's so the life changing aspect of it is far more dramatic, at the end of a day most doctors decisions on elective surgeries are based on two things, the risks to the patients life and the risks to the doctor of potentially being sued due to a bad op, in both cases the risks in a man's procedure are dramatically lower so I genuinely believe it has nothing to do with repressing women's choices.

Morag

I disagree, in the UK a woman can apply to have her tubes tied, see the medical professionals needed, go to counselling and have them done. I know someone who was 21 had no kids and had her tubes done on her 23rd birthday.

This is a medical policy in this country which represses women's choices.