In America 1 in 3 women will be sexually assualted in her lifetime

Killer Wench

A year ago, I was at an IHOP waiting for my order. This location was on a college campus and most everyone in the place were college students. There were three college guys talking about their hangovers. One guy asks, somewhat loudly, "hey, have you ever used a roofie on a girl?". He asked it so casually as if he was about to share his own recent experience. I loudly turned my chair in their direction and glared. The other two guys looked sheepish and they told their friend to shut up. There wad no shame in the guy's face but the subject was changed.

Czarcasm

blatantrereg wrote: »

I've become aware that the levels of sexual abuse against women and children are extremely high. It's not people trying to forward an agenda, it's just a shocking fact that people like me who've never experienced it (and come from a background where it's relatively uncommon) find easier to think is not the case.

Lisak's stuff looks pretty straightforward. 1 in 16 male students admitted to date rape in his survey. The average number of rapes committed was 6. That's 375 rapes per 1000 women, going by self-confessed student date rapists alone. The actual number of rapes from all sources at all times would be considerably higher.

Reaction to it is the same mentality that has people enjoy eating a chocolate bar after being shown evidence that child slavery was involved in its production. There are loads of examples of this sort of thinking: Easier to just reject distressing information than deal with it.

It helps if you explain how you came up with that 375 figure (1,000/16)x6. It even helps you in the article by saying it was a survey of 2,000 men, done over a TWENTY YEAR period. That's not exactly what I'd consider a well done survey when on most college campuses you can gather your evidence from 2,000 males in a day! The figures are skewed because of the sample size over a considerable time scale. Hardly so straightforward now, is it?

Nobody is rejecting the distressing information, they're just questioning it's validity and it's context.

kiffer

Czarcasm wrote: »

I'm never surprised by people's inability to comprehend anything that doesn't agree with their opinions tbh. I think the point you're trying to make is the people's inability to effectively communicate their opinions.

Um yes, sorry I thought that would be clear from context, obviously I was wrong and it was not, clearly communication is taking place but it is less effective than it could be... I would go as far as to say that even amongst the best communicators there are misunderstandings and failures...

Interesting that you would take issue with my communication skills (or lack thereof), when a simple spelling mistake in the above paragraph, if English were not my second language, I would become frustrated by your use of the word "thst" because it wouldn't be a word I'm familiar with, whereas because I'm an accomplished English speaker, I understand you meant "that".

I was not taking issue with your skill or reading comprehension but that of people general, I understand that that point may not have been made clearly enough and as such may need to be clarified. Sadly typing on the small keyboard on my phone leads to a number typos. I hope that this post has fewer as obviously I would not wish to tax those reading for whom English might be a third language rather than a first or second language.

Given that you have a different perspective on what the OP meant, you're quite right, it DOES give that paragraph a different meaning.

Huzzah!.

My opinion on that then would be that rape, sexual assault, sexual violence, whatever label you choose to put on it, is indeed "just something that humans do", as we're no different from animals, we're just a higher evolved animal than most species, but we can still give in to our most base evolutionary instincts, despite how civilised we like to think we have become.

"Higher evolved" makes little sense in my opinion but yeah... I get what you mean.

It's strange that you should say that, as there's a fantastic amount of threads in AH lately that had me inspired to start a thread on "Perception? Whatever you're thinking yourself", however I'm still formulating the opening post in my mind so that thread won't be started today, but to give you some idea, I don't know if you've ever seen the film Crash, but it's an inspiring social commentary and a film I'd recommend to anyone (that, and The Butterfly Effect, personal favorite but a bit of a mind fcuk that one, based on the chaos theory of the same name).

"Crash" is more relevant though to the topic at hand-








I don't remember claiming to be an expert on sexual assault, sexual violence nor rape, not to mention the fact that the last couple threads on this issue have seemed to concentrate on the issue of sexual assault, sexual violence and rape from a purely heterosexual point of view, neglecting to mention that these issues also affect the LGBT community, and if you think the heterosexual statistics are under reported, good luck to you trying to gather statistics from the LGBT community.

Or did you mean I suck on the topic of effective communication? Well I'd be the first to hold my hands up there and tell you that it's a well documented fact around here that aside from the fact I'm no wordsmith (where the fcuk is Wibbs when you need him?), I'm not the sharpest pencil in the box, and I've spoken Irish longer than I've spoken English, which is only one of six other languages in which I can communicate in a hell of a lot more effectively.

Maybe I was taking issue with the original point being made badly rather than your different interpretation of it?
I only speak two and a half languages... and only one of them at a useful level.

I think it's pretty clear that this is a topic that we as humans in general suck at talking about, there are lots of crossed wires and people going off in the "wrong" direction with things... getting lost on semantics and differing opinions on what even counts as touching... what counts as sexual assault and what counts as rape.

Half the problems would fall immediately by the wayside if we were (as a species) better at communication.

The yes even you was meant for all readers of that line and not just you... it was not meant as an attack on your reading comprehension or your ability to express yourself but rather to remind us all that this is hard topic to discuss and we all often get the wrong end of the stick... stupid idioms.
I should have been asleep hours ago...
Zzzzzz

blatantrereg

Lisak's stuff looks pretty straightforward. 1 in 16 male students admitted to date rape in his survey. The average number of rapes committed was 6. That's 375 rapes per 1000 women, going by self-confessed student date rapists alone. The actual number of rapes from all sources at all times would be considerably higher.

Czarcasm wrote: »

It helps if you explain how you came up with that 375 figure (1,000/16)x6. It even helps you in the article by saying it was a survey of 2,000 men, done over a TWENTY YEAR period. That's not exactly what I'd consider a well done survey when on most college campuses you can gather your evidence from 2,000 males in a day! The figures are skewed because of the sample size over a considerable time scale. Hardly so straightforward now, is it?

Nobody is rejecting the distressing information, they're just questioning it's validity and it's context.

http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/cache/documents/1348/134851.pdf

Journal paper describes four samples totalling 1882 respondents between 1991 and 1998. They distributed the surveys at main pedestrian traffic points and gave $3-$4 to participate. Duplicates were eliminated from results, and results were consistent across the four samples. There is nothing wrong with their methods.

The 1 in 16 figure is in the article I link (slightly higher in fact), however the average committed is just over 4, not 6. 6 is the average number of rapes by repeat offenders.

So on closer inspection, my 375 figure should be 250, but that was my mistake - the source checks out as being highly credible and valid.

blatantrereg

Another way of looking at it is to think how many rapists you've met. Statistically one in sixteen. The average number of rapes committed by a 20-something year old male is over 0.25.

Galwayguy35

blatantrereg wrote: »

Another way of looking at it is to think how many rapists you've met. Statistically one in sixteen. The average number of rapes committed by a 20-something year old male is over 0.25.

So are you saying 1 man in every 16 is a rapist?

blatantrereg

Galwayguy35 wrote: »

So are you saying 1 man in every 16 is a rapist?

No, I'm saying more than one man in sixteen is a rapist. One in sixteen college students confessed to rape in the studies referred to by the OP. I would expect the overall figure to be higher.

Here is the question they answered yes to:

"Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want you to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)."

The mean age of the respondents was 26.

Grayson

blatantrereg wrote: »

No, I'm saying more than one man in sixteen is a rapist. One in sixteen college students confessed to rape in the studies referred to by the OP. I would expect the overall figure to be higher.

Here is the question they answered yes to:

"Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want you to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)."

The mean age of the respondents was 26.

that's strangly a very open question.

I was seeing a girl. We got drunk. We went home. We had sex. She was a bit crazy in bed. Next morning I mention that she was a bit wild the night beforehand. She says that she has no idea what I was talking about. She didn't drink on a regular basis and because of that she had no memory of what happened the night before.

I once got out of bed when i was with a girl because i realised how drunk she was. Up till the point she started talking weird crap i thought she was ok. She'd dragged me into the bed, got naked and started pulling off my clothes. When i got out of the bed she sobered up a little and asked me what i was doing there. This was a girl that I had walked home with. We'd talked the whole way. She'd made a move and then the crap had happened.

And for what it matters, I ended up on a separate occasion having sex with someone who i didn't want to. I was drunk, she climbed on top of me. I didn't want to without protection. She didn't care and i was too drunk to be bothered and gave up protesting after a few minutes.
It was good sex in the end.

Once you mix drink into a scenario it gets very confusing. I'm not saying there aren't guys who are taking advantage of drunk girls when they know that the women are completly incapable of saying yes or no. But in two of the situations above i could have been considered a rapist/attempted rapist despite the fact that I wasn't the one who initiated sex.
In the other I could be considered a victim.

tritium

Grayson wrote: »

that's strangly a very open question.

I was seeing a girl. We got drunk. We went home. We had sex. She was a bit crazy in bed. Next morning I mention that she was a bit wild the night beforehand. She says that she has no idea what I was talking about. She didn't drink on a regular basis and because of that she had no memory of what happened the night before.

I once got out of bed when i was with a girl because i realised how drunk she was. Up till the point she started talking weird crap i thought she was ok. She'd dragged me into the bed, got naked and started pulling off my clothes. When i got out of the bed she sobered up a little and asked me what i was doing there. This was a girl that I had walked home with. We'd talked the whole way. She'd made a move and then the crap had happened.

And for what it matters, I ended up on a separate occasion having sex with someone who i didn't want to. I was drunk, she climbed on top of me. I didn't want to without protection. She didn't care and i was too drunk to be bothered and gave up protesting after a few minutes.
It was good sex in the end.

Once you mix drink into a scenario it gets very confusing. I'm not saying there aren't guys who are taking advantage of drunk girls when they know that the women are completly incapable of saying yes or no. But in two of the situations above i could have been considered a rapist/attempted rapist despite the fact that I wasn't the one who initiated sex.
In the other I could be considered a victim.

It reminds me of a case in the uk a few years ago. A guy had been accused of raping a girl on a night out when both of them had gotten basically hammered. The police/CPS had no intention of bringing charges, the the girl was telling anyone who'd listen that she'd been raped and he was a rapist. Young lad had to force the police to bring rape charge against him so he could clear his name. The evidence in court was that she had initiated the sex and he was fairly quickly acquitted. I seem to recall absolute outrage from some women's groups at theverdict though.

Of course it's a single sample point, so I offer it as a relevant story rather than hard evidence for anything

tritium

tritium wrote: »

It reminds me of a case in the uk a few years ago. A guy had been accused of raping a girl on a night out when both of them had gotten basically hammered. The police/CPS had no intention of bringing charges, the the girl was telling anyone who'd listen that she'd been raped and he was a rapist. Young lad had to force the police to bring rape charge against him so he could clear his name. The evidence in court was that she had initiated the sex and he was fairly quickly acquitted. I seem to recall absolute outrage from some women's groups at theverdict though.

Of course it's a single sample point, so I offer it as a relevant story rather than hard evidence for anything

That sounds like an interesting case. Can you provide a link so I can read about it?

tritium

Candie wrote: »

That sounds like an interesting case. Can you provide a link so I can read about it?

Ok Candie, I'll put on my "world is nice" hat and assume your not questioning the bona fides or shout me down on a "can't give a link so must be a lie" basis. A quick google gives this one.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/date-rape-acquittal-stokes-row-a-person-who-is-drunk-and-because-she-is-drunk-consents-to-an-act-which-she-would-not-when-sober-still-consents-1511857.html

It doesn't cover all the detail so I'll see if I can find any more around this if you're really interested

tritium

tritium wrote: »

Ok Candie, I'll put on my "world is nice" hat and assume your not questioning the bona fides or shout me down on a "can't give a link so must be a lie" basis. A quick google gives this one.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/date-rape-acquittal-stokes-row-a-person-who-is-drunk-and-because-she-is-drunk-consents-to-an-act-which-she-would-not-when-sober-still-consents-1511857.html

It doesn't cover all the detail so I'll see if I can find any more around this if you're really interested

It was a genuine question, and one I wouldn't have asked if I wasn't 'really' interested.

tritium

Candie wrote: »

It was a genuine question, and one I wouldn't have asked if I wasn't 'really' interested.

Right so, I fully accept your assurance. A quick google against the name of the accuse will give a host of links that detail different aspects of the case and it's fallout

I hadn't looked at this one for a few years (I actually thought it was much more recent). Scanning it now there are probably plenty of disturbing aspects for both sides if the argument to pick up on

tritium

tritium wrote: »

It doesn't cover all the detail so I'll see if I can find any more around this if you're really interested

Thank you for the link, but as you say it's sketchy on detail. What I'm particularly interested in is how he got the police to charge him (to ultimately clear his name) when the 'victim' wouldn't.

I thought only the alleged victim of a crime could make a criminal complaint.

Anyway, horrible ordeal for the poor chap.

Edited to add: I'm not keen on googling rape cases on the computer I'm using at the moment, it's not that I'm just lazy

tritium

Candie wrote: »

Thank you for the link, but as you say it's sketchy on detail. What I'm particularly interested in is how he got the police to charge him (to ultimately clear his name) when the 'victim' wouldn't.

I thought only the alleged victim of a crime could make a criminal complaint.

Anyway, horrible ordeal for the poor chap.

Edited to add: I'm not keen on googling rape cases on the computer I'm using at the moment, it's not that I'm just lazy

I think once he went to the policethe CPS may have decided it was in the public interest to bring the case, but I'm not entirely certain of that

blatantrereg

Grayson wrote: »

that's strangly a very open question.

I was seeing a girl. We got drunk. We went home. We had sex. She was a bit crazy in bed. Next morning I mention that she was a bit wild the night beforehand. She says that she has no idea what I was talking about. She didn't drink on a regular basis and because of that she had no memory of what happened the night before.

I once got out of bed when i was with a girl because i realised how drunk she was. Up till the point she started talking weird crap i thought she was ok. She'd dragged me into the bed, got naked and started pulling off my clothes. When i got out of the bed she sobered up a little and asked me what i was doing there. This was a girl that I had walked home with. We'd talked the whole way. She'd made a move and then the crap had happened.

And for what it matters, I ended up on a separate occasion having sex with someone who i didn't want to. I was drunk, she climbed on top of me. I didn't want to without protection. She didn't care and i was too drunk to be bothered and gave up protesting after a few minutes.
It was good sex in the end.

Once you mix drink into a scenario it gets very confusing. I'm not saying there aren't guys who are taking advantage of drunk girls when they know that the women are completly incapable of saying yes or no. But in two of the situations above i could have been considered a rapist/attempted rapist despite the fact that I wasn't the one who initiated sex.
In the other I could be considered a victim.

All of those girls wanted to have sex with you. The question is asking about people who didn't want to, but who were too intoxicated to resist. It's excludes people who wanted to because they were drunk, or who might have regretted it later. It's very clearly talking about rape, in other words.

Three Seasons

B0jangles wrote: »

You bring up an interesting thing: why is it that any time a discussion of rape/sexual assault happens, the discussion almost immediately zeros in on edge cases like Romeo and Juliet cases and consent between two drunk people.

These are scenarios which very rarely turn into actual criminal investigations. I know several people who have been raped. None have gone to the police, no-one has been publically accused or convicted of raping them. I know no-one who has actually pursued a case to the stage of creating a police file.

So I know multiple rape-victims. I have yet to meet a person falsely or unfairly accused of rape. Why do the latter category always dominate any online discussion of the topic?

I've yet to meet a rapist to the best of my knowledge, does that mean they don't exist?

Czarcasm

blatantrereg wrote: »

http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/cache/documents/1348/134851.pdf

Journal paper describes four samples totalling 1882 respondents between 1991 and 1998. They distributed the surveys at main pedestrian traffic points and gave $3-$4 to participate. Duplicates were eliminated from results, and results were consistent across the four samples. There is nothing wrong with their methods.

The fact that you think their survey methods are infallible backs up my earlier assertion that people will latch on to the first couple of google search results that happen to back up their opinion, whereas if you actually realised anything about surveys and statistics, you would at least acknowledge that there is always room for error, sometimes even as in the case of this survey- massive chasms for error and the interpretation of the data set and statistics collated from it. Here, have a look for yourself at a less disjointed link than you posted, which lets be honest, the data is about ten years out of date too so that would make the stats even less relevant-


http://www.wcsap.org/sites/www.wcsap.org/files/uploads/webinars/SV%20on%20Campus/Repeat%20Rape.pdf

The 1 in 16 figure is in the article I link (slightly higher in fact), however the average committed is just over 4, not 6. 6 is the average number of rapes by repeat offenders.

So on closer inspection, my 375 figure should be 250, but that was my mistake - the source checks out as being highly credible and valid.

*cough*... in YOUR OPINION, the source checks out as being highly credible and valid, but, given that you couldn't even interpret your own source properly-

that was my mistake

blatantrereg wrote: »

Another way of looking at it is to think how many rapists you've met. Statistically one in sixteen. The average number of rapes committed by a 20-something year old male is over 0.25.

Personal opinion and pulling statistics out of nowhere now? And this is why I hate statistics- "20 something males commit a quarter of a percent of
rapes" is what you're saying there.

Ahh christ this is hopeless... we can't even agree on data interpretation now, never mind the terminology and the statistical methods used!

B0jangles

Three Seasons wrote: »

I've yet to meet a rapist to the best of my knowledge, does that mean they don't exist?

I'm not sure I get your point.

I never said false rape claims don't exist because I personally have never encountered one. I'm wondering why when the topic of rape comes up, false claims and edge cases like Romeo and Juliet cases almost immediately jump to being the centre of the discussion.

Also chances are if you do know a rapist they are unlikely to tell you about it unless they think you share their attitudes. I knew the guy who raped a friend of mine. He was charming, good-looking, and popular. He gave off no weird vibes at all.

blatantrereg

Czarcasm wrote: »

*cough*... in YOUR OPINION, the source checks out as being highly credible and valid, but, given that you couldn't even interpret your own source properly-

I did interpret my source properly. I corrected the mistake in my previous post. Silly strawman argument. Like me saying you didn't quote my post properly therefore you're wrong. You are wrong, but that's not the reason why.

Personal opinion and pulling statistics out of nowhere now? And this is why I hate statistics- "20 something males commit a quarter of a percent of
rapes" is what you're saying there.

Ahh christ this is hopeless... we can't even agree on data interpretation now, never mind the terminology and the statistical methods used!

It's not personal opinion, it's a logical conclusion.

Saying the average number of rapes committed by a man in his twenties is 0.25 is correct and supported by the journal article you are dismissing as invalid. One quarter - not a quarter of a percent. As in 25 rapes per hundred men; 0.25 rapes per man.

You demonstrate a level of comprehension that firmly supports your belief that you know better, without any contradictory evidence at all, than papers in reputable journals.

Because it's stupid to think you know better than journal papers unless you have some compelling evidence to contradict them.

tritium

B0jangles wrote: »

I'm not sure I get your point.

I never said false rape claims don't exist because I personally have never encountered one. I'm wondering why when the topic of rape comes up, false claims and edge cases like Romeo and Juliet cases almost immediately jump to being the centre of the discussion.

Also chances are if you do know a rapist they are unlikely to tell you about it unless they think you share their attitudes. I knew the guy who raped a friend of mine. He was charming, good-looking, and popular. He gave off no weird vibes at all.

Had anyone mentioned to him that he was a rapist?

Genuine question, just curious

kiffer

Three Seasons wrote: »

I've yet to meet a rapist to the best of my knowledge, does that mean they don't exist?

You probably have... you just don't know who...
I know I have met at least one rapist that used force... though the details are sketchy because his victim wouldn't tell me what happened until years later because she "was worried what I would do".
I know one coworker many years ago was telling me one night about his friend/person he knew who would drug girls and how he could tell that the drug had taken hold would be to ask nonsense questions... I very quickly distanced myself from them.

Shiit the more I think about it the more of this cráp keeps coming up...
Still don't think the term rape culture is right though... we definitely have a problem though.

seenitall

the_syco wrote: »

He mentioned a fact about his balls hanging at a different lengths, and this is somehow an open invitation to molest him?


Due to men being instructed that women are meek little creatures? Seriously? Even the weight lifters? I'm calling bullsh|t.

LOL, are you for real??? She didn't molest him, because he obviously invited her "fondling". She was feeling his knees (again, at his invitation), then he spread his legs apart and said: "Actually, Gwyneth, my balls are interesting too" or something to that effect. Do you know the difference between inviting someone's touch and being molested? Because it's a huge one, so I can only hope that despite being so quick to mistake 'please touch me' for 'don't touch me', you're not as quick to mistake 'don't touch me' for 'please touch me'.

Yes, women are the weaker sex in general, and therefore there is more of a social taboo in place for a man hitting a woman than the other way around.

You're calling bullsiht? What delicious irony.

B0jangles

tritium wrote: »

Had anyone mentioned to him that he was a rapist?

Genuine question, just curious

I don't know - I don't want to go into the details of what happened obviously, since it's not my story to tell, but I can say that he could hardly have believed the incident to be consensual unless he had some very warped views on what constitutes consent.

I know my manner towards him changed hugely though I did not say anything directly (at my friend's request).

kiffer

seenitall wrote: »

LOL, are you for real??? She didn't molest him, because he obviously invited her "fondling". She was feeling his knees (again, at his invitation), then he spread his legs apart and said: "Actually, Gwyneth, my balls are interesting too" or something to that effect. Do you know the difference between inviting someone's touch and being molested? Because it's a huge one, so I can only hope that despite being so quick to mistake 'please touch me' for 'don't touch me', you're not as quick to mistake 'don't touch me' for 'please touch me'.

Yes, women are the weaker sex in general, and therefore there is more of a social taboo in place for a man hitting a woman than the other way around.

You're calling bullsiht? What delicious irony.

So he implied consent? I haven't seen the scene so I don't know what happened but I've been told a few times that only explicit consent counts... explicit enthusiastic consent.
did he say touch my balls? Did she ask and he say yes?

Was he actually very uncomfortable but had to put on a laughing brave face because of perceived social pressure to not be a whinging man child?

seenitall

kiffer wrote: »

So he implied consent? I haven't seen the scene so I don't know what happened but I've been told a few times that only explicit consent counts... explicit enthusiastic consent.
did he say touch my balls? Did she ask and he say yes?

Was he actually very uncomfortable but had to put on a laughing brave face because of perceived social pressure to not be a whinging man child?

I linked to the relevant YouTube clip, post no. 117.

He implied consent. He was hardly going to say straight out "Please touch my balls" like a sleaze with no social skills, if there is an opportunity to have a laugh about it, such as his implied 'sauciness' generated.

Also, why would he be uncomfortable if he actually invited her attention? I don't know, if I invite someone to touch my genital area, I will dam sure know exactly what I am doing and why. Not very likely to feel uncomfortable it about tbh.

You have been misinformed. The implied consent counts too, such as in this example, or when two people get off and have sex with each other. A load of times, there is no need to be as direct as saying: "I want to touch your breasts now, is that OK? ... I WANT to have sex with you, it's rather urgent you know." Usually things are implied...

...or are your hook-ups a bit different?

Czarcasm

blatantrereg wrote: »

I did interpret my source properly. I corrected the mistake in my previous post. Silly strawman argument. Like me saying you didn't quote my post properly therefore you're wrong. You are wrong, but that's not the reason why.

If you cannot see why it is an incentivised survey offering money to college students (which if you had read through the report, is LOADED with bias) who know there are no repercussions for the answers they put down, then I don't think you WANT to see any critique of the survey.

It's not personal opinion, it's a logical conclusion.

blatantrereg wrote: »

Another way of looking at it is to think how many rapists you've met. Statistically one in sixteen. The average number of rapes committed by a 20-something year old male is over 0.25.

How is that not introducing personal opinion? You're asking someone to think about the number of rapists they've met? I mean, come onnn!

Saying the average number of rapes committed by a man in his twenties is 0.25 is correct and supported by the journal article you are dismissing as invalid. One quarter - not a quarter of a percent. As in 25 rapes per hundred men; 0.25 rapes per man.

The survey figures are TEN years out of date, not to mention that the first sample was taken nearly twenty years ago, among college students, who, from the survey report, were between 18 - 71 years of age! As for your "20-something year old male" committing "quarter of a rape"... You can't see a problem with that sentence, no?

Participants

Participants in this study were 1,882 students at a mid-sized, urban commuter university

where students are diverse both in age and ethnicity. The mean age of the sample was 26.5

years

(SD =8.28), with a range of 18 to 71. More than 20% were over age 30, and nearly

8% were over 40. In terms of ethnicity, 66.3% identified themselves as White, 9.6% as

African American, 8.6% as Asian, 5.0% as Other, 4.1% as Mixed, 3.3% as Hispanic, 1.2%

as Native American, and 0.7% as Cape Verdean.

The total sample consisted of four separate studies

(n =576; n =587; n = 123; n =

596), conducted between 1991 and 1998. The three largest samples each represented

10% to 12% of the total male student population of the university at the time. The four

samples were combined to provide a large enough subsample of rapists to permit the

proposed analyses. Although the percentage of rapists within the samples varied from

4% to 9.8%,

X2(3, N = 1,881) = 11.57, p < .05, there were no significant differences

among the samples on any of the variables used in the analyses. The mean number of

rapes per rapist, the mean number of other violent acts committed, and the proportion

of rapists who used physical force versus intoxication was consistent across the samples.

Although the samples were gathered at two- to four-year intervals, a careful set of

analyses were conducted to ensure that there were no duplicates among the participants in

the combined sample. A computer program, designed for sensitivity rather than specificity,

first screened subjects for possible matches on the basis of demographic information.

One hundred possible matches were then randomly selected and thoroughly analyzed for

similarity on a number of features, including reported educational levels and occupations

of the parents. This process ensured that there were no duplicates among the 120 identified

rapists.

Procedures

Each of the four samplings followed the same procedure. Distribution tables were set up

at main pedestrian traffic points on campus. Men were offered $3 or $4 to participate (the

amount varied for the different samplings) in a study described generally as "childhood

experiences and adult functioning." There was nothing in the study description that could

have alerted potential participants to the nature of the questions to be asked. Participants

read and signed informed consent forms prior to participating. Participants were given the

questionnaire to complete in private, returned the questionnaire to the same table and

received their payment.

You demonstrate a level of comprehension that firmly supports your belief that you know better, without any contradictory evidence at all, than papers in reputable journals.

Because it's stupid to think you know better than journal papers unless you have some compelling evidence to contradict them.

I have an eight year old here who could interpret that data better than you've done, but neither he nor I have time to be slicing and dicing ten year old out of date biased statistics. Actually I'll just copy and paste what the report itself says about it's own conclusions-

Several limitations of this study bear mention. First, since the data are self-report, there

is no independent corroboration of the acts reported by the participants. As noted earlier,

this is a facet of this area of research that is difficult to overcome, given the hidden nature

of the majority of interpersonal violence. While it is possible that some research participants

might be motivated to report acts of violence that they did not truly commit, it is difficult

to conjure what would motivate such false reporting. Indeed, two separate studies inwhich subsamples of participants were interviewed subsequent to their self-reports (Lisak

& Roth, 1990; Lisak et aI., 2000) indicated little or no change in reporting between the

self-report and interview. Further, discrepancies tended to be strongly in the direction of

underreporting on self-report questionnaires compared to follow-up interviews.

Another limitation pertains to the generalizability of the findings. Because of the nonrandom

nature of the sampling procedures, the reported data cannot be interpreted as estimates

of the prevalence of sexual and other acts of violence. Nevertheless, the percentage

of men in this sample who reported rape and/or attempted rape is quite consistent with

percentages from other samples (e.g., Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987; Lisak & Roth,

1988; Mosher & Anderson, 1986; Ouimette & Riggs, 1998).

hatrickpatrick

B0jangles wrote: »

You bring up an interesting thing: why is it that any time a discussion of rape/sexual assault happens, the discussion almost immediately zeros in on edge cases like Romeo and Juliet cases and consent between two drunk people.

These are scenarios which very rarely turn into actual criminal investigations. I know several people who have been raped. None have gone to the police, no-one has been publically accused or convicted of raping them. I know no-one who has actually pursued a case to the stage of creating a police file.

So I know multiple rape-victims. I have yet to meet a person falsely or unfairly accused of rape. Why do the latter category always dominate any online discussion of the topic?

Well in my case it's because I actually do know a guy who was a victim of that.

But in a wider context, most guys who bring this up simply object to gender specific legislation in any form. Equality should mean equality in both directions, including responsibility for making bad decisions. Right now it's as if guys are expected to always be more responsible, which is simply not right.

kiffer

seenitall wrote: »

I linked to the relevant YouTube clip, post no. 117.

Can't watch in work...

He implied consent. He was hardly going to say straight out "Please touch my balls" like a sleaze with no social skills, if there is an opportunity to have a laugh about it, such as his implied 'sauciness' generated.

Also, why would he be uncomfortable if he actually invited her attention? I don't know, if I invite someone to touch my genital area, I will dam sure know exactly what I am doing and why. Not very likely to feel uncomfortable it about tbh.

You have been misinformed. The implied consent counts too, such as in this example, or when two people get off and have sex with each other. A load of times, there is no need to be as direct as saying: "I want to touch your breasts now, is that OK? ... I WANT to have sex with you, it's rather urgent you know." Usually things are implied...

...or are your hook-ups a bit different?

Hookups? What are we American College Students?
Terminology aside... I've never done the casual sex thing, I've stuck for the most part to sex within relationships and generally communication hasn't been too bad...

Edit: posting from my phone is getting a bit glitchy... I'm not able to do the bulk of your post justice.
Long story short, there are plenty of people around telling us that explict consent is required, and that if you are in any doubt then don't do anything.

seenitall

kiffer wrote: »

Can't watch in work...



Hookups? What are we American College Students?
Terminology aside... I've never done the casual sex thing, I've stuck for the most part to sex within relationships and generally communication has

Well, when you do get a chance to watch it, I would be interested in your opinion as to whether Mr. Mack was molested, or whether he actively (albeit indirectly) invited Ms. Paltrow's contact with his genitals. I mean, don't watch it on my account or anything , but you seem to have a few questions that are best answered by watching the clip itself.

Didn't know the term was specifically American, I guess I've been watching too much crap American TV and having too little casual sex to be accurately informed...:(

Latchy

Lou.m wrote: »

http://frontpagemag.com/2013/dgreenfield/1-in-4-swedish-women-will-be-raped-as-sexual-assaults-increase-500/

Strangely the Muslim community in Sweden represented 77% of the reported cases.

Statistics aside , I know the theme thread as OP asks is ' Can we change the human species?

Reading this reply below in the comments section of that article , assuming it's a genuine reply from a Muslim and the statistics bear fruit then in this case , Muslim men's attitudes to Swedish/western woman if below is anything to go by then it's quite shocking and disturbing ..



Joe 11 weeks ago

" Western women are cheap and offensive. We Muslims are here, here to stay, and we have a right to take advantage of this situation. It is our view of the matter that should prevail. Western goods, like the land on which we now live, belong to Allah and to the best of men — his Believers. Western women, too, belong to us — our future booty."

“It is far too easy to get a Swedish wh*re ”. “Many immigrant boys have Swedish girlfriends when they are teenagers. But when they get married, they get a proper woman from their own culture who has never been with a boy. That’s what I am going to do. I don’t have too much respect for Swedish girls. I guess you can say they get f****d to pieces.”

Hamid Abdallah ,muslim immigrant in Sweden

Muslim immigrants rape 24,000 and gang rape 7,000 females in France on average yearly .

^ The idea as suggested in some of the follow up comments that Swedish men are afraid to protect their women from rape by Muslim men out of some fear of been called Racist is one thing but that shyte bag's attitude above would only add to the Anti-Muslim ranks in any western society .

WayneMolloy

Latchy wrote: »

Statistics aside , I know the theme thread as OP asks is ' Can we change the human species?

Reading this reply below in the comments section of that article , assuming it's a genuine reply from a Muslim and the statistics bear fruit then in this case , Muslim men's attitudes to Swedish/western woman if below is anything to go by then it's quite shocking and disturbing ..



Joe 11 weeks ago

" Western women are cheap and offensive. We Muslims are here, here to stay, and we have a right to take advantage of this situation. It is our view of the matter that should prevail. Western goods, like the land on which we now live, belong to Allah and to the best of men — his Believers. Western women, too, belong to us — our future booty."

“It is far too easy to get a Swedish wh*re ”. “Many immigrant boys have Swedish girlfriends when they are teenagers. But when they get married, they get a proper woman from their own culture who has never been with a boy. That’s what I am going to do. I don’t have too much respect for Swedish girls. I guess you can say they get f****d to pieces.”

Hamid Abdallah ,muslim immigrant in Sweden

Muslim immigrants rape 24,000 and gang rape 7,000 females in France on average yearly .

^ The idea as suggested in some of the follow up comments that Swedish men are afraid to protect their women from rape by Muslim men out of some fear of been called Racist is one thing but that shyte bag's attitude above would only add to the Anti-Muslim ranks in any western society .

Nodin when he reads your post - http://4.bp.blogspot.com/-zLZAkfBBopA/UTBzd_QAfCI/AAAAAAAAG1g/lz1Jk0E3kf0/s400/WWFUltimateWarriorWM8Return.gif

blatantrereg

Czarcasm wrote: »

If you cannot see why it is an incentivised survey offering money to college students (which if you had read through the report, is LOADED with bias) who know there are no repercussions for the answers they put down, then I don't think you WANT to see any critique of the survey.









How is that not introducing personal opinion? You're asking someone to think about the number of rapists they've met? I mean, come onnn!




The survey figures are TEN years out of date, not to mention that the first sample was taken nearly twenty years ago, among college students, who, from the survey report, were between 18 - 71 years of age! As for your "20-something year old male" committing "quarter of a rape"... You can't see a problem with that sentence, no?








I have an eight year old here who could interpret that data better than you've done, but neither he nor I have time to be slicing and dicing ten year old out of date biased statistics. Actually I'll just copy and paste what the report itself says about it's own conclusions-

Logical conclusions from credible research.

The commentary you refer to suggests that the figures underrepresent the number of rapes, not overrepresent them. Do you really think more innocent men will say they raped someone, than rapists will pretend they have not??

Further, discrepancies tended to be strongly in the direction of underreporting on self-report questionnaires compared to follow-up interviews.

It's also consistent with other similar studies:

the percentage of men in this sample who reported rape and/or attempted rape is quite consistent with percentages from other samples (e.g., Koss, Gidycz, & Wisniewski, 1987; Lisak & Roth, 1988; Mosher & Anderson, 1986; Ouimette & Riggs, 1998).

It's not biased research. It's credible peer-reviewed research which is consistent with previous findings. I understand your hostility to the information, which I suppose reflects a positive attitude towards your fellow man more than anything else. However your emotional reaction is stopping you from engaging in a rational manner, so I'll leave off trying to talk to you any further about it.

tritium

blatantrereg wrote: »

Logical conclusions from credible research.

The commentary you refer to suggests that the figures underrepresent the number of rapes, not overrepresent them. Do you really think more innocent men will say they raped someone, than rapists will pretend they have not??



It's also consistent with other similar studies:



It's not biased research. It's credible peer-reviewed research which is consistent with previous findings. I understand your hostility to the information, which I suppose reflects a positive attitude towards your fellow man more than anything else. However your emotional reaction is stopping you from engaging in a rational manner, so I'll leave off trying to talk to you any further about it.

As I mentioned a couple of times at this stage I wouldn't be citing Koss to support anything. That survey has been discredited completely at this stage. Google research by Christina Hoff Sommers for more detail. I haven't gone through the other sources cited yet, or the original study but if I get time later I'll do so

Czarcasm

blatantrereg wrote: »

Logical conclusions from credible research.

The commentary you refer to suggests that the figures underrepresent the number of rapes, not overrepresent them. Do you really think more innocent men will say they raped someone, than rapists will pretend they have not??

If I'm a college student looking for easy money with no repercussions, I'll say whatever you want me to say. None of the men in the survey said they raped anyone, because-

a) They were not asked the simple question "have you ever raped another person?"

b) None of the men who answered the survey saw anything they did as rape.

It's also consistent with other similar studies:

Other similarly biased studies.

It's not biased research. It's credible peer-reviewed research which is consistent with previous findings. I understand your hostility to the information, which I suppose reflects a positive attitude towards your fellow man more than anything else.

You clearly don't understand why I object to what I see as a badly done survey with even worse conclusions to back up a hypothesis that the researcher had already formed. How many times does the research refer to the men as rapists? A survey of college jocks with an incredibly small sample size and hardly qualifying as the smartest bananas in the bunch, I mean, given the questions asked in the survey, the author was able to claim the participants had no idea what the survey was about?

However your emotional reaction is stopping you from engaging in a rational manner, so I'll leave off trying to talk to you any further about it.

I haven't displayed any sort of emotion, merely frustration at the fact that we're both reading the same survey report and one of us has failed to read what's written in black and white. I wish I had time to drill down into the figures and analyse the data even further, but you're so stuck on your "peer review" nonsense that you'll take the survey as gospel, because it suits your point of view, rather than perform any critical analysis of the data presented.

Do you honestly think scientist's don't know which side their bread is buttered and that their funding for research is often dependent on them being able to come up with the right data to support their funding sources position? Scientists are just as human as the rest of us, and just as likely to want to back up their own hypotheses by whatever means necessary.

I can engage in a rational manner, but not when the data we have to work with is so badly flawed. At least we can agree on the fact that it's not even worth talking about.

hatrickpatrick

blatantrereg wrote: »

It's not biased research. It's credible peer-reviewed research which is consistent with previous findings. I understand your hostility to the information, which I suppose reflects a positive attitude towards your fellow man more than anything else. However your emotional reaction is stopping you from engaging in a rational manner, so I'll leave off trying to talk to you any further about it.

Do you know
(a) whether these statistics include statutory rape, and
(b) whether they include instances in which the issue at hand is consent and alcohol?

For me anyway, the above two issues would prevent me from taking any such statistics seriously.

lanyard

I read a couple of years ago that 1 in 3 women serving in the US military have been raped. I often think about that statistic when I see americans being so reverent about their troops.

In 2003, a survey of female veterans found that 30 percent said they were raped in the military. A 2004 study of veterans who were seeking help for post-traumatic stress disorder found that 71 percent of the women said they were sexually assaulted or raped while serving. And a 1995 study of female veterans of the Gulf and earlier wars, found that 90 percent had been sexually harassed.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103844570
http://www.nytimes.com/2012/03/09/opinion/sexual-violence-and-the-military.html?_r=0