Rape Victims Don't Know They Were Raped

[CBL4]

Nearly 10 percent of the female students surveyed at Washington State University reported they had been victims of attempted rape, and 8.5 percent said they had been raped while enrolled at the Pullman school, a new study found.http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2002757854_webwsu23.html

If this were real it would be horrible but of course it is a lie:
In the study, only 24.7 percent of the females and 12.5 percent of the males who experienced forced sex labeled it as rape, said the report authored by Thomas Brigham, Gretal Liebniz and Samantha Swindell of WSU.In other words Brigham, Liebniz and Swindell had an agenda and decided that they knew better than the victims whether a rape had actually occur.

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped. This is horrible. But by pretending the other women are too stupid to know if they were raped, this study trivialized the real rapes.

BTW, the real percentages are probably much lower still. The authors contacted 7000 students but only 2500 responded. This is a notoriously bad method of getting accurate results.

CBL

[Art Vandelay]

Nearly 10 percent of the female students surveyed at Washington State University reported they had been victims of attempted rape, and 8.5 percent said they had been raped while enrolled at the Pullman school, a new study found.
Apparently, by "surveyed", they really mean "answered". And by "said", they mean "were interpreted as saying". If they didn't label it as rape, how could they say that it's rape?

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped.Or at least, reported they were raped. Now that the question of whether "rape" actually means "rape" has been raised, do we know that those that claimed to be raped were? Perhaps they, like those in charge of the survey, are playing with the truth. That's the trouble with radical feminists. They cast everything into doubt.

[Kiless]

That's the trouble with radical feminists. They cast everything into doubt.

Why 'radical feminists'?

[Art Vandelay]

Because I don't think all feminists do this. Some are honest, but the radical ones give them a bad name.

[Mycroft]

When I was in college there was a radical feminist organization that floated a pamphlet to "educate" people about rape, and it essentially said that if a guy didn't stop and verbally ask permission before holding a girl’s hand, putting his arm around her, or kissing her, that he was guilty of rape. Heck, even then you could be guilty if she had a drink or something.

[Dancing David]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2002757854_webwsu23.html

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped. This is horrible. But by pretending the other women are too stupid to know if they were raped, this study trivialized the real rapes.

CBL

Ah, nothing like rape revisionism in the morning!

I take it that for some reason you could not find how they defined rape or you chose not to lists that.
And of course you use a word like strupid because you are objective and unbiased?

The issue of rape is that it is non-consesual sex, it does not have to be forced by physical violence, but it can be non-consensual for a wide variety of reasons that a victim might not label as rape. Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners, how often do you think a victim might not call rape as rape?

And for the statistics, well this is part of crime reporting by all sorts of victims but don't let that deter you from being a sceptic and touting 'sceince' when it suits your political agenda.

[Dancing David]

That's the trouble with radical feminists. They cast everything into doubt.


And the problem with our society that labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting. Not to mention the use of alcohol and having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out and calling it something other than rape.

You haven't presented evidence that the authors of the study altered the data or used a higher standard of rape than non-consensual sex, so where is your evidence that they are radical feminists?

[Dancing David]

These sure are the articles I would expect a radical feminist to publish!


Lindemann, D., Brigham, T.A., Harbke, C. and Alexander, T. (2005) Toward Errorless Condom Use: A Comparison of Two Courses to Improve Condom Use Skills. AIDS and Behavior 18, 35-42

Brigham, T.A., Donahoe, P., Gilbert, B., Thomas, N., Zemke, S., Koonce, D., and Horn, P. (2002) Psychology and AIDS education: Reducing high risk sexual behavior. Behavior and Social Issues, 12, 10-18.

Lindemann, D. and Brigham, T. A. (2002). A Guttman scale to assess condom use skills among college students. AIDS and Behavior, 15, 23-28.

Godat, L., and Brigham, T.A.(1999).The effects of self-management training program on employees of a mid-sized organization. Journal of Organizational Behavior,19, 65-83.

Peeler, C., Far, J., Miller, J. and Brigham, T.A.(2000). An analysis of the effects of a program to reduce heavy drinking among college students. Journal of Alcohol and Drug Education, 39-54

Brigham, T.A. (1989). Self-management for Adolescents. New York: Guilford Press.

Brigham, T.A. (2005). Psychology Applied to Daily Living: Dealing with friends, school, alcohol, and sex 2nd edition. Boston: Pearson Publishers.


I will look up the other two after work, since they aren't listed on the faculty directory I am assuming they are graduate student.

[aerocontrols]

And the problem with our society that labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting. Not to mention the use of alcohol and having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out and calling it something other than rape.

Your bias is showing.

[aerocontrols]

http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/education/2002757854_webwsu23.html

If this were real it would be horrible but of course it is a lie:
In other words Brigham, Liebniz and Swindell had an agenda and decided that they knew better than the victims whether a rape had actually occur.

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped. This is horrible. But by pretending the other women are too stupid to know if they were raped, this study trivialized the real rapes.

BTW, the real percentages are probably much lower still. The authors contacted 7000 students but only 2500 responded. This is a notoriously bad method of getting accurate results.

CBL

I'm not following your math. If 8.5% reported they had been victims of an attempted rape, and 25% of those labelled their forced sex experience as rape, then isn't the article saying that about 35% of these women experienced forced sex?

[C.J.]

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped. This is horrible. But by pretending the other women are too stupid to know if they were raped, this study trivialized the real rapes.


First thing: where did you get the 2.5%? The figures I read were 8.5% for women, 1.8% for men.

Secondly, as someone familiar with research on prevalence of sexual assault, I can speak to your concern. Let's say there are two questions that are part of a survey. One asks: "Have you ever had sex with someone when you didn't want to because they threatened to use physical force against you?" Another question is "Have you ever been raped?" It is possible to answer these two questions differently, and when there are differences the only data I've ever seen show women answering "yes" to the first question and "no" to the second. This group has been referred to as "unacknowledged rape victims" because they report experiencing an event that meets legal definitions of rape (the first question), but do not identify it as such (the second question).

Why this occurs is an open question. Many explanations I've read suggest that it's a self-definitional thing on the woman's part; she only sees rapes as being perpetrated by strangers, for example, so she doesn't define what her husband or boyfriend did as rape. Another explanation involves a self-defensive mechanism, wherein a woman doesn't want to identify as being a rape victim because of the stigma attached to it.

In any case, the implication that the lack of willingness to acknowledge one's status as a rape victim somehow trivializes "real" rape victims is a significant misconception; unacknowledged victims are as "real" rape victims as anyone else. From my perspective, I might argue that your argument trivializes the real rape experiences of unacknowledged victims.


BTW, the real percentages are probably much lower still. The authors contacted 7000 students but only 2500 responded. This is a notoriously bad method of getting accurate results.

Not really, no. It's entirely possible there is a response bias, but that's inherent in the method of distributing the survey, not in the response rate. A sample size of 2500 for a single-site internet survey isn't bad.

[Jekyll]

I'm not following your math. If 8.5% reported they had been victims of an attempted rape, and 25% of those labelled their forced sex experience as rape, then isn't the article saying that about 35% of these women experienced forced sex?


No, because you multiply, rather than add, the probabilities as you are talking about 24% of 8% of the whole population.

so 8.5% *24.7% =2.1% of women say they have been raped.

Which is still a scarily high number.

In the study, only 24.7 percent of the females and 12.5 percent of the males who experienced forced sex labeled it as rape
In the category of sexual coercion, 8.5 percent of females and 1.8 percent of males reported they suffered forced sexual penetration

[C.J.]

In other words Brigham, Liebniz and Swindell had an agenda and decided that they knew better than the victims whether a rape had actually occur.


Thought this deserved a separate mention. Most researchers in the area sexual assault use legal definitions of rape to set their criteria for inclusion into groups of victims and non-victims. Assuming (and it is an assumption, since I haven't read the original study) that Brigham et al. are following the conventions in psychological studies, they are probably closer to being agendaless than anything else. Unless you want to argue that legal definitions of rape in Washington state are based on some kind of agenda....

[Mercutio]

C.J.'s analysis of the questions that might have been asked is spot on.

One can think of this, if it is less inflammatory, not as a matter of bias but as a matter of competing operational definitions. In any scientific investigation, the researchers must operationally define their variables, and there is no one perfect way to operationalize any construct. In sex research in particular, self-report data can be wildly different depending on definitions; for this reason, it is imperative that multiple different operational definitions are used. (one survey famously showed that the majority of American adolescents did not define oral or anal sex as sex, so could be very experienced and yet call themselves virgins.)

In the study of rape, many studies have shown that men can engage in an activity that satisfies both the experimental operationalization of rape, and the legal definition of rape, and yet honestly believe that they have not raped. Is this feminism tainting research results? No, of course not. It is the normal practice of science. We disagree on operationalizations all the time, and we (usually) emerge with a consensus, or perhaps a meta-analysis that shows the effect of the different operationalizations on our obtained results.

Separate issue--there is often a rather substantial difference between what the researchers conclude, and what a newspaper article says that they conclude.

[C.J.]

No, because you multiply, rather than add, the probabilities as you are talking about 24% of 8% of the whole population.

so 8.5% *24.7% =2.1% of women say they have been raped.

Which is still a scarily high number.

Ah! This must be where the 2.5% number came from. Still, this quote from the newspaper article

In the category of sexual coercion, 8.5 percent of females and 1.8 percent of males reported they suffered forced sexual penetration (italics added)

indicates that while 2.1% of women say they were raped, 8.5% of women had an experience that meets legal criteria for rape, likely for rape in the first degree in Washington state (assuming "force" in the question tracks onto "forcible compulsion" in the statute).

[Kiless]

Thanks Merc and C.J. I was getting a little worried if this was turning into a thread I usually avoid.

[aerocontrols]

No, because you multiply, rather than add, the probabilities as you are talking about 24% of 8% of the whole population.

so 8.5% *24.7% =2.1% of women say they have been raped.

Which is still a scarily high number.


I wasn't adding. ;)

24.7 percent of the females... who experienced forced sex labeled it as rape

So, there were X% of females who experienced forced sex, and a quarter of them labelled it as rape.

And from his original post:

8.5 percent [of female students] said they had been raped while enrolled at the Pullman school, a new study found.

If 8.5% say "I was raped" and only about 25% of the women who experienced rape labelled it as such, then 8.5% * 4 = 34% of them experienced it.

The more precise wording you quoted from later in the article clears up my issue, of course.

A correct version of the end of the lead paragraph would be written as:

and 8.5 percent said they had suffered forced sexual penetration while enrolled at the Pullman school, a new study found.

which agrees with the wording later in the article.

[Jekyll]

I wasn't adding. ;)

You know how it is....I always assume the most stupid mistake is the most likely;) .

I still want to know what definition of 'forced' is being used.

[Beerina]

Physical rape, or coercion? Remember "Rather, sexual pressure ushers, guides or shepherds the process of sexual awakening." (http://206.225.95.123/forumlive/showthread.php?t=50687) :eek: :rolleyes: :jaw-dropp

[Ladewig]

And the problem with our society that labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting.

I read of rape perps claiming the first two items on your list, but I have never heard of the third. Do you have a citation for anyone claiming that?

[CBL4]

The opening paragraph of the article said nearly 10%. I did not realize that the "reporter" change 8.5% to nearly 10%. I multiplying 0.247 x 10% = 2.5% (approximately.)

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

[Cleon]

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

Ah, good, just as long as you're following the evidence. :rolleyes:

[CBL4]

I re-read the article realized I misread something. The 10% figure was attempted rape and the 8.5% was actual rape. My previous comment about the reporter was wrong.

CBL

[C.J.]

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.


Brigham is a psychologist, and in most psychological studies, a woman's self-identification as a rape victim, or lack thereof, is not the determinant of whether or not she's been raped. Rather, it's whether she has been through an experience that meets the legal definitions applicable in a state. Given the lack of access to the methods of the original study, and that Brigham appears to have a publication record in peer-reviewed journals, I think it's safe to assume that he's following the conventions of the field and using state law as the basis for his definition of rape.*

If you grant that this is the case**, then all you can say is that many of the women in the Brigham et al. study who were raped according to the laws of the state of Washington did not identify the event as a rape to researchers. This is in itself an interesting research question, but it in no way indicates that Brigham et al. were "absurd" in how they pursued or reported their research findinds.

C.J.

* I admit this is an assumption, but I find it a reasonable one to make under the circumstances. If you can demonstrate to me that Brigham et al. were using an overly broad definition of rape, then I'll adjust my response accordingly.

** I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

Well, maybe you won't grant that this is the case, but you'll have to present some evidence that Brigham et al. have an agenda, and "I don't like/believe the results" doesn't count.

[Metullus]

And the problem with our society that labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting. Not to mention the use of alcohol and having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out and calling it something other than rape.
Have you evidence in support of your assertion?

I have heard of men accused of rape using some of these as defenses, but I am not aware that "our society" "labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting". If I am not mistaken the contrary is in fact true, these are crimes - at least in every state in which I have lived. As is knowingly "having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out" or not otherwise capable of giving consent.

[TragicMonkey]

Um, I don't want to derail or anything, but a question just occured to me and it's bugging me because I can't answer it.

Is consensual sex in a case of mistaken identity rape?

I mean, when one party deliberately deceives the other, who consents to sex but would not have had they known the other party was someone else. Like, if an identical twin swapped places with his brother and slept with his sister-in-law without her knowing about the switch. It certainly seems wrong, but is it rape?

[CBL4]

Originally posted by CJ
[I]n most psychological studies, a woman's self-identification as a rape victim, or lack thereof, is not the determinant of whether or not she's been raped. Rather, it's whether she has been through an experience that meets the legal definitions applicable in a state. Given the lack of access to the methods of the original study, and that Brigham appears to have a publication record in peer-reviewed journals, I think it's safe to assume that he's following the conventions of the field and using state law as the basis for his definition of rapeThis is exactly what I mean by "trivialization." If a woman believes she has been raped, I tend to believe her. If a woman does not think she has been raped, I tend to believe her.

If psychologists (or the legal system) redefine rape to include 4 times as many people, then I believe that this trivializes real rape. Rape is a horrible event. An "unwanted experience" is something very different.

Some idiot feminists have defined rape to include many consensual sexual encounters e.g. verbal persuasion mean rape. I am immediately suspicious of researchers whose interpretations are this far from the victims. Unfortunately, the news reports do not give provide a good distinction between "rape" and "unwanted experience." Nor do they provide the question list. This makes it very difficult to make firm conclusions.

As I said, I trust the victims' perceptions.

CBL

[epepke]

The issue of rape is that it is non-consesual sex, it does not have to be forced by physical violence, but it can be non-consensual for a wide variety of reasons that a victim might not label as rape.

There's a good place to go for the definition, and that's the laws.

Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners, how often do you think a victim might not call rape as rape?

Get a grip! You're going off into histrionic delusion-land here. I'm 44, and as far as I can remember, American Culture has been such that at every turn its participants have tried to make me feel ashamed of the fact that I have a penis.

I've seen Andrea Dworkin and Christina Hoff-Sommers in person. Dworkin recieved a $3000 honorarium from the Women's Center and talked to a crowd of 300, most of them cheering. Hoff-Sommers got expenses provided by a local students' group, talked to about 40, and the Women's Studies program felt fit to provide a heckling line of four people that jeered at her practically every full stop.

And for the statistics, well this is part of crime reporting by all sorts of victims but don't let that deter you from being a sceptic and touting 'sceince' when it suits your political agenda.[/QUOTE]

[Dancing David]

Your bias is showing.

Most likely, but those are examples of forced sex that are not often called rape.

[Dancing David]

I read of rape perps claiming the first two items on your list, but I have never heard of the third. Do you have a citation for anyone claiming that?


It is usualy a family thing where a parent is aware of the sexual abuse in a family and doesn't view it as unacceptable behavior. Not common but still occurs , what I find more frightening is when a child tells a parent they have been sexually assaulted and the parent responds by calling the child a liar. I am not saying that there aren't children who are manipulative, I just find the case where a child reports sexual abuse to the non-offending parent and the n.o. parents punishes or shames the child disturbing.

[Dancing David]

The opening paragraph of the article said nearly 10%. I did not realize that the "reporter" change 8.5% to nearly 10%. I multiplying 0.247 x 10% = 2.5% (approximately.)

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

The societal definition of rape is a variable one which is why, as two poster have pointed out, it is not generaly used. The legal definition of rape is fairly clear.

The societal standard for rape can vary and sometimes excludes the following:
-a victim willing going to the apartment of the perptrator
-the victim accepts a ride from the perpetrator
-the victim had consented to sex on a prior occesion but did not consent at the time
-the victim wore provocative clothing
-the victim was passed out
-the victim is married, dating or living with the perpetrator
-the victim is over the age of thirtenn
-the victim should have known it would happen

(please insert 'alleged' prior to each use of victim and perpetrator)

[Dancing David]

Have you evidence in support of your assertion?

I have heard of men accused of rape using some of these as defenses, but I am not aware that "our society" "labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting". If I am not mistaken the contrary is in fact true, these are crimes - at least in every state in which I have lived. As is knowingly "having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out" or not otherwise capable of giving consent.

Well, I suggest that I did state my case forcefully but I suggest that you survey a wide variety of people about the following topics, and that you focus on small twon and rural areas. Which is the population I serve quite often:

1. Can a woman refuse sex with her husband?
2. Can a woman agree to sex and then change her mind any time during the act?
3. Can a victim behave in ways that lead to them being vitims, through clothing, going for a ride or enterenting an apartment.
4. I live in a large college town, the non-consensual sex with a victim who is passed out is very common, and the perptrators and thier friends do not view it as rape.

[Dancing David]

There's a good place to go for the definition, and that's the laws.

Which is what I am refering to, are you okay?
There is a vast difference between the legal defintion of rape and the societal definition of rape.




Get a grip! You're going off into histrionic delusion-land here. I'm 44, and as far as I can remember, American Culture has been such that at every turn its participants have tried to make me feel ashamed of the fact that I have a penis.

I live in a large twon, it is in a rural area, when I was in high school, there were frinds of mine who reprted that they had been sexualy assaulted in a date stituation or for accepting a ride home, in college I had friends who were date raped and also had been sexualy assualted under the influence of alcohol.

That is not delusion land, especialy the fact that in many parts of our society the victim is blamed for the sexual behavior of the perpetrator , they are shamed for repoting the crime and often ostracised.
Last week I interviewed a woman who repotrted that when she was sixteen she was sexualy assaulted by a member of her church, she reported the crime. The consequence was that she was harrased by the grandchildren of the perpetrator and she felt she should drop out of high school.


I've seen Andrea Dworkin and Christina Hoff-Sommers in person. Dworkin recieved a $3000 honorarium from the Women's Center and talked to a crowd of 300, most of them cheering. Hoff-Sommers got expenses provided by a local students' group, talked to about 40, and the Women's Studies program felt fit to provide a heckling line of four people that jeered at her practically every full stop.

I don't recall mentioning Dworkin or Sommers, but perhaps I am remiss and have forgotten.
There are radical feminists, there is no evidence that Brigham is one.


And for the statistics, well this is part of crime reporting by all sorts of victims but don't let that deter you from being a sceptic and touting 'sceince' when it suits your political agenda.

It also doesn't prevent CBL4 from saying that the researchers have an agenda when there is no evidence that there is one, do you feel that the researchers have an agenda?

[C.J.]

This is exactly what I mean by "trivialization." If a woman believes she has been raped, I tend to believe her. If a woman does not think she has been raped, I tend to believe her.

I know you're using the word "tend" here, but would you believe a woman who said she had been raped using some, as you put it, "idiot feminist" definition? Given the tenor of your comments, probably not, which brings me to my next point:


If psychologists (or the legal system) redefine rape to include 4 times as many people, then I believe that this trivializes real rape. Rape is a horrible event. An "unwanted experience" is something very different.

Indeed, rape is a horrible event, and there are plenty of "unwanted experiences" that do not meet that standard.

But tell me, what is real rape? You use the term above, so you obviously have some conception of what constitutes a "real" rape. I'd like to know what definition you are using, but if you'd rather not share it or only have a vaguely defined concept, that's okay. My point is simply to get you thinking about it, and thinking about what it means when my definition of "real rape" and your definition of "real rape" differ. Who's right? Does real rape require that the victim be physically injured? Does the victim have to physically struggle for it to be real rape? What about forced oral or anal sex? Is that real rape? Or do only victims get to define rape?

Because this last question is what you imply when you say that psychologists/lawyers are "redefining" rape to quadruple the numbers of victims. And the only group I'm aware of that takes this approach are really radical feminists.


Some idiot feminists have defined rape to include many consensual sexual encounters e.g. verbal persuasion mean rape. I am immediately suspicious of researchers whose interpretations are this far from the victims.

Note that the Brigham study, if it's typical of the area, has a very limited and specific definition of rape that is predicated around unwanted penetration by force or threat of force. It seems from your post you are concerned with definitions of rape that are overbroad, but the use of legal or legally-derived definitions in psychological research is designed to avoid just this pitfall.


Unfortunately, the news reports do not give provide a good distinction between "rape" and "unwanted experience." Nor do they provide the question list. This makes it very difficult to make firm conclusions.

True. It would be nice to have more info; in the study itself they are certain to be clear about their definitions.


As I said, I trust the victims' perceptions.

Victim perceptions are important, but so is the actuality of the event. If a woman did not want to have intercourse, but a man used force or the threat of force to penetrate her despite that, wouldn't you call that rape? What if the woman involved didn't?

[Ladewig]

I read of rape perps claiming the first two items on your list, but I have never heard of the third. Do you have a citation for anyone claiming that?


It is usualy a family thing where a parent is aware of the sexual abuse in a family and doesn't view it as unacceptable behavior. Not common but still occurs...

That is not a citation. That is simply a repitition of your claim. Can you point me to a U.S. criminal case where that was used as a defense; I'm not even asking for a case where it was successfully used as a defense (although I could ask for that given that the original claim was that "our society ... labels ... child rape as acceptable parenting"). Heck, I'll even settle for a blog that states it is acceptable parenting.

... what I find more frightening is when a child tells a parent they have been sexually assaulted and the parent responds by calling the child a liar. I am not saying that there aren't children who are manipulative, I just find the case where a child reports sexual abuse to the non-offending parent and the n.o. parents punishes or shames the child disturbing.

I agree that there are instances of that occurring in the U.S., but aren't those cases a matter of the non-offending parent being afraid of the offending spouse or being afraid of what will happen to the family after the crime is reported or being in denial about the matter - none of which involves considering the rape to be acceptable. Unlike you, I consider this second case to be less frightening than the first situation - i.e. accepting that the rape happened and that nothing should be done.

[Metullus]

Well, I suggest that I did state my case forcefully but I suggest that you survey a wide variety of people about the following topics, and that you focus on small twon and rural areas. Which is the population I serve quite often:

1. Can a woman refuse sex with her husband?
2. Can a woman agree to sex and then change her mind any time during the act?
3. Can a victim behave in ways that lead to them being vitims, through clothing, going for a ride or enterenting an apartment.
4. I live in a large college town, the non-consensual sex with a victim who is passed out is very common, and the perptrators and thier friends do not view it as rape.
That some people may believe these things to be acceptable is a long way from our society labeling such behaviors as acceptable. Never in my adult life have I encountered anyone that argues that a woman cannot refuse to have sex with her husband - indeed, if anything, the complaint I am more likely to hear is that a wife is, for whatever reason, refusing to do so, and there is nothing short of giving up bowling that the husband can do to change her mind. And the fact is that men have been convicted of sexually assaulting their wives.

Can a victim behave in ways that lead them to be victims? Of course they can. Walking home alone from a bar at 2:00am might, for example, lend itself to a certain vulnerability to attack. Accepting a ride from a stranger might accomplish the same thing. Wearing provocative clothing might attract unwanted attention. Even entering an apartment would certainly not decrease a woman's vulnerability. Does that mean that the victim is in any way responsible for the attack? No. Two different questions.

Am I surprised that non-consensual sex with a victim that is unconscious might be not uncommon in a college town? Regrettably, no (although I would ask for evidence in support of such a claim). A lot of idiots and creeps live in college towns. Am I surprised that the perpetrators of such an act would not consider it to be wrong? Again, no; but then most rapists don't consider their crimes to be "wrong". Or if they did they have an interest in not admitting to the fact.

You did a bit more than state your case "forcefully". You explicitly stated that our society considered "date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable [parenting]." Do you stand by that statement, or am I to interpret your latest post as a repudiation of that statement?

[epepke]

Which is what I am refering to, are you okay?

Fine, thanks.

I live in a large twon, it is in a rural area, when I was in high school, there were frinds of mine who reprted that they had been sexualy assaulted in a date stituation or for accepting a ride home, in college I had friends who were date raped and also had been sexualy assualted under the influence of alcohol.

Yeah. So report it to the police, and get it prosecuted.

That is not delusion land, especialy the fact that in many parts of our society the victim is blamed for the sexual behavior of the perpetrator , they are shamed for repoting the crime and often ostracised.

Delusion land is where you claim, and I quote: "Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners..."

That's just wrong.

Yes, rape happens. Yes, it's bad. Yes, it should be prosecuted.

The idea that American culture acts like rape is just peachy keen is delusional.

Last week I interviewed a woman who repotrted that when she was sixteen she was sexualy assaulted by a member of her church, she reported the crime. The consequence was that she was harrased by the grandchildren of the perpetrator and she felt she should drop out of high school.

I believe you.

But first, of course the system is imperfect. Of course there isn't universal protection. Let me remind you that I did bodyguard duty for three women with restraining orders against males.

But also, and this should be obvious, you're a social worker. That means that you only see the cases where the system hasn't worked. Generalizing that idea to the whole of American society is unsupportable.

Not that I condemn you. I admire you for doing this. But you're simply going to get a skewed idea of reality if you try to generalize. The majority of rape cases are handled appropriately. If anything, they're biased toward the victim. At FSU, an entire fraternity was demolished because two of the members raped a blacked-out drunk woman. But you do not see them, because of your choice of profession.

[Dancing David]

That is not a citation. That is simply a repitition of your claim. Can you point me to a U.S. criminal case where that was used as a defense; I'm not even asking for a case where it was successfully used as a defense (although I could ask for that given that the original claim was that "our society ... labels ... child rape as acceptable parenting"). Heck, I'll even settle for a blog that states it is acceptable parenting.



I agree that there are instances of that occurring in the U.S., but aren't those cases a matter of the non-offending parent being afraid of the offending spouse or being afraid of what will happen to the family after the crime is reported or being in denial about the matter - none of which involves considering the rape to be acceptable. Unlike you, I consider this second case to be less frightening than the first situation - i.e. accepting that the rape happened and that nothing should be done.

I think that I am using the word 'society' in a different sense than you do, I take it as the interactions of the collective of humans in a population,. So that would include the legal systems and formal networks of a society as defined legaly but it would alos include the consensus actions of individuals which have a collective impact.

I have nothing other than the anecdotes of fiveteen years of social work and I have interviewed more than 400 in mental health assesments and probably about sixty in domestic violence assesments, so it is all anecdotal. I would say that this event of the non-offending parent accepting the behavior of the offending parent has been told to me at least ten times. So given the law of thirds I believe it to be true in three cases. Then there is also this more common thing that is really ooky to me where a parent who is not offending tolerates the sexual behavior with an older step child, which is really strange but I have heard about thirty times, so I belive ten of them to be true.

So all anecdotal and best, and that was some hyperbole in that statement, which may cause people to doubt my validity as a reporter.

Now the case of the non-offending parent just not believing thier child seems to be fairly common, but that would be streching the use of the word 'acceptable', and the domestic violence component is unfortunately widespread.

In terms of formal social networks, I feel that child protective services are failing the children on a number of levels, that still would not constiture 'acceptance' so , it was hyperbole.

[Dancing David]

That some people may believe these things to be acceptable is a long way from our society labeling such behaviors as acceptable. Never in my adult life have I encountered anyone that argues that a woman cannot refuse to have sex with her husband - indeed, if anything, the complaint I am more likely to hear is that a wife is, for whatever reason, refusing to do so, and there is nothing short of giving up bowling that the husband can do to change her mind. And the fact is that men have been convicted of sexually assaulting their wives.

I suppose that you and I have encountered different people, my work brings me into contact with the more unfortunate of society, I have interviewed twenty women who reported that the local police refused to take thier report of rape. I can only guess at the level of validity of these reports.

I agree that marital rape is a crime now, but if you speak with community educators about sexual assault, they may still report the same responses that they recieved in the seventies. I don't know, I had a very good friend who frequently spoke to high schools on the subject of rape from 1978 to 1983, in small twons she ofetn encountered very strong resistance to the idea of marital rape.
I may be very outdated, and would be thrilled to think that was the case.


Can a victim behave in ways that lead them to be victims? Of course they can. Walking home alone from a bar at 2:00am might, for example, lend itself to a certain vulnerability to attack. Accepting a ride from a stranger might accomplish the same thing. Wearing provocative clothing might attract unwanted attention. Even entering an apartment would certainly not decrease a woman's vulnerability. Does that mean that the victim is in any way responsible for the attack? No. Two different questions.


Yes I agree, but I still have heard people blame victims for exactly those things. And the rides I was discussing were not from strangers but aquantences in high schools.


Am I surprised that non-consensual sex with a victim that is unconscious might be not uncommon in a college town? Regrettably, no (although I would ask for evidence in support of such a claim).

I believe that there were a twenty reported case of drunk rape in the town where I live, I will have to get back to you on that.

A lot of idiots and creeps live in college towns. Am I surprised that the perpetrators of such an act would not consider it to be wrong?

I am more concerned about thier roomates and friends not telling them to stop.

Again, no; but then most rapists don't consider their crimes to be "wrong". Or if they did they have an interest in not admitting to the fact.

You did a bit more than state your case "forcefully". You explicitly stated that our society considered "date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable [parenting]." Do you stand by that statement, or am I to interpret your latest post as a repudiation of that statement?

No I shant repudiate myself, but date rape is very common, and it is not sanctioned. The marital rape issue is open to debate,it is an unsubstantiated claim.

I am guilty of hyperbole no doubt. I still feel that my statements contain truth. Maybe I should increase my medication, and get more sleep. I may have assumed I was posting with Jedi Knight and got out of control.

[Dancing David]

Fine, thanks.

That is good.


Yeah. So report it to the police, and get it prosecuted.

Not mine to do, some did tell the teachers in thier schools and well, they were told to ignore it, but that was thirty years ago, so hopefully the world has changed.

Delusion land is where you claim, and I quote: "Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners..."

That's just wrong.

Yes, rape happens. Yes, it's bad. Yes, it should be prosecuted.

The idea that American culture acts like rape is just peachy keen is delusional.

the idea that american as individuals always condemn the act of rape would be equally delusional, I would use the word mistaken, I do know my statements to be hyperbole. That means they are not delusions.
;)




I believe you.

But first, of course the system is imperfect. Of course there isn't universal protection. Let me remind you that I did bodyguard duty for three women with restraining orders against males.

i am glad that you helped them. very dangerous.


But also, and this should be obvious, you're a social worker. That means that you only see the cases where the system hasn't worked. Generalizing that idea to the whole of American society is unsupportable.

Guilty of hyperbole. Not guilty of genralization, any more than reserachers are stupid for using an objective rather than a subjective standard for judging reported rapes.


Not that I condemn you. I admire you for doing this. But you're simply going to get a skewed idea of reality if you try to generalize.

Nah, I am twisted already, the profession just gives me more ammo to tout my twisted beliefs. It has something to do with my childhood and alien abductions.

The majority of rape cases are handled appropriately.

Well considering the lack of reporting and the difficulty of prosecution and the alarming false conviction rates, I can't agree.

If anything, they're biased toward the victim. At FSU, an entire fraternity was demolished because two of the members raped a blacked-out drunk woman. But you do not see them, because of your choice of profession.

No I don't see them becaue I live in central illinois. I am sorry that the farternity got razed, sounds like a raw deal. It sure doesn't happen at the ********(name erased) University in my town. But then it is the home of the fraternity and soroity system.

I will willing admit that my sample is very biased, but because of isotropy I believe that the phenomena I have seen in low income and support challeged populations is equaly proportional in the more affluent parts of society.

[Metullus]

I suppose that you and I have encountered different people, my work brings me into contact with the more unfortunate of society, I have interviewed twenty women who reported that the local police refused to take thier report of rape. I can only guess at the level of validity of these reports.
Do not be so certain that you and I encounter people who are so very different from one another. In any event, I will not argue with your experience - it is what it is.

I agree that marital rape is a crime now, but if you speak with community educators about sexual assault, they may still report the same responses that they recieved in the seventies. I don't know, I had a very good friend who frequently spoke to high schools on the subject of rape from 1978 to 1983, in small twons she ofetn encountered very strong resistance to the idea of marital rape.
I may be very outdated, and would be thrilled to think that was the case.
My point is that our society has decided that marital rape is wrong, and we have laws in place that reflect that. Does everyone in our society share this perspective? No. But that does not mean that our society condones marital rape.

Yes I agree, but I still have heard people blame victims for exactly those things.

As have I, but these people are in my estimation very much in the minority.

And the rides I was discussing were not from strangers but aquantences in high schools.

I understand. For this reason my daughter will be thoroughly trained in self-defense before she goes to Junior High School.

I believe that there were a twenty reported case of drunk rape in the town where I live, I will have to get back to you on that.

What is the population of your town?

I am more concerned about thier roomates and friends not telling them to stop.

My "idiots and creeps" comment applies to them as well.


No I shant repudiate myself, but date rape is very common, and it is not sanctioned. The marital rape issue is open to debate,it is an unsubstantiated claim.

I am guilty of hyperbole no doubt. I still feel that my statements contain truth. Maybe I should increase my medication, and get more sleep. I may have assumed I was posting with Jedi Knight and got out of control.
Okay, date-rape is not sanctioned by society, although it may be fairly widespread. I submit that neither is marital rape sanctioned by society. And you have not provided any justification for your assertion that child rape is considered "good parenting" by our society.

Hyberbole indeed. But what part of what you said constitutes "truth"? No one denies that rape occurs. And I have not seen anyone here suggest that rape is not evil.

[CBL4]

Originally posted by CJ
But tell me, what is real rape? You use the term above, so you obviously have some conception of what constitutes a "real" rape. I'd like to know what definition you are using, but if you'd rather not share it or only have a vaguely defined concept, that's okay. I have only a vague definition. Off the top of my head, it would be something like "clearly, unwanted sex obtained by force or some serious threat." This would include all kinds of sex but not verbal or emotional coercion. There are lots of gray areas here but all definition will have them.

Note that the Brigham study, if it's typical of the area, has a very limited and specific definition of rape that is predicated around unwanted penetration by force or threat of force. It seems from your post you are concerned with definitions of rape that are overbroad, but the use of legal or legally-derived definitions in psychological research is designed to avoid just this pitfall.We are speculating here without many facts. Perhaps it is a definition such as this which is similar to mine. You base your supposition that it is on your knowledge of psychological research. I doubt that a definition such as this would provide such a vast difference between the victim and researchers.

True. It would be nice to have more info; in the study itself they are certain to be clear about their definitions.You give the benefit of the doubt to the researchers. I do not. Without more information, it is impossible to know who is correct. I respect but disagree with you. But we have no way to determine who is correct until we get access to the study.

BTW, if you have know of other studies with reasonable, specific definition of rape where the victims and the researcher have very rates of rape, I would be very interested. It would certainly support your view point.

CBL

[C.J.]

I have only a vague definition. Off the top of my head, it would be something like "clearly, unwanted sex obtained by force or some serious threat." This would include all kinds of sex but not verbal or emotional coercion. There are lots of gray areas here but all definition will have them.
While verbal or emotional coercion is a pretty lame way to get someone to have sex with you, I agree that these things do not constitute rape. Some research would include it under a blanket term "sexual aggression," but when it does so the distinction between these acts and rape is made very clear. Like your definition, force or threat of force is typically the deciding factor.

We are speculating here without many facts. Perhaps it is a definition such as this which is similar to mine.
It's unfortunately true that newspapers don't provide for us the data we need to make good assessments of research, though I suppose it's not too reasonable of me to criticize a newspaper for not being an academic journal. As I mention above, I would suspect that Brigham et al. and you have very similar definitions for rape.

I doubt that a definition such as this would provide such a vast difference between the victim and researchers. I know I'm making some assumptions here, but let's assume Brigham et al. are using a measure like the Sexual Experiences Survey, a very popular scal;e given to people to assess the consensual or nonconsensual nature of their sexual encounters. Participants filling out the SES are asked to note whether they had experienced specific behaviors; the word "rape" does not appear at all in the main part of the questionnaire.

The part that seems perplexing is that a woman is faced with a question very much like this: "How often has a man used physical force (such as cornering you, pinning you against a wall, grabbing you, holding you down, hitting you, or otherwise restraining your movement or physically hurting you) to make you have sexual intercourse when you did not want to?" I'd gather given your response above that any situation that meets this criteria qualifies as rape according to your definition. Let's say the participant indicates that this has happened once. At the end of the questionnaire, the participant sees a different question:" Have you ever been raped? If so, how many times?" What Brigham et al. (and others) have found is that a significant number of women will answer "no" to this question even though they have indicated that they had an experience which meets a pretty clear definition of rape. It's a puzzler; what are we to make of this situation where a woman has experienced something that meets legal definitions (or at the very least, reasonable and stringent definitions) of rape, but does not say she's been raped? Should one response be taken more seriously? Some researchers would say that yes, the behavioral response should be given more weight because in that case, the participant is simply matching an experience to a definition, which is arguably less problematic more than the "Have you ever been raped" question because rape is a word loaded with connotations and sub-text. First, though rape victims are by and large treated infinitely better in the America of 2006 than they were, say, 30 years ago, there is still a stigma to being a rape victim. The participant may fear to self-identify as a victim and have to accept that mantle. Second, there are still some people who believe a "real" rape is perpetrated by a stranger using a weapon as part of a surprise attack. While this has no statutory (or indeed, logical) basis, someone may not identify their bona fide rape experience as such because they knew the perpetrator. In brief, there's much less room for bias in answering the behavioral question.

What we see is that the rape victim is being totally honest in their filling out the questionnaire; they really had an experience that meets definitions of rape and they really don't label it as such. We also see that the authors of the study are being accurate in listing the rate for rape how they do (based on the behavioral questions), and they have also been so fortunate as to find another interesting question to address: why do some portion of women who have by definition been raped deny that this is so? Is their definition different? How is it different? Where did they learn it? Do they think only women who somehow deserve it get raped?

The discrepancy you see as some kind of ideological slight-of-hand to increase rape statistics is anything but. Rather, it's an observation that forms the basis of a fascinating and important research question: how do rape victims perceive their assault? Are they motivated to label it differently? Why? What purpose does it serve?

You give the benefit of the doubt to the researchers. I do not. Without more information, it is impossible to know who is correct. I respect but disagree with you. But we have no way to determine who is correct until we get access to the study.
Fair enough.


BTW, if you have know of other studies with reasonable, specific definition of rape where the victims and the researcher have very rates of rape, I would be very interested. It would certainly support your view point.
Hmm. All my files are at work, so I have nothing handy. I think there was a 1994 study by Kahn and colleagues and a 1996 one by...Layman? Gidycz? They discuss the phenomenon of unacknowledged rape victims, and at the very least should have a good reference page and some background in the introduction.

[Dancing David]

Do not be so certain that you and I encounter people who are so very different from one another. In any event, I will not argue with your experience - it is what it is.

I should have used maye rather than suppose in my statement, I take it to mean a level of doubt in my assumptions, which seems to be used differently by you.



My point is that our society has decided that marital rape is wrong, and we have laws in place that reflect that. Does everyone in our society share this perspective? No. But that does not mean that our society condones marital rape.

And again I am not using a legal definition of society, I am using a more cultural aggergate definition, of the collective behavior of individuals.

As have I, but these people are in my estimation very much in the minority.

It would seem that our estimations differ

I understand. For this reason my daughter will be thoroughly trained in self-defense before she goes to Junior High School.

I just preffered to teach by daughter some of the pressure techniques and then how to slap an ear, but I wish that the informal social network did not try to cover rape.

What is the population of your town?

Two towns , one sevety thousand, another tirtyfive and a college of 44,000, so larger that Springfield, taken togther.

My "idiots and creeps" comment applies to them as well.


Idiots, creeps and slimy perps are contibutors to the collective aggregate of individuals. The social definition of society is the one I use.




Okay, date-rape is not sanctioned by society, although it may be fairly widespread. I submit that neither is marital rape sanctioned by society. And you have not provided any justification for your assertion that child rape is considered "good parenting" by our society.

Hyberbole indeed. But what part of what you said constitutes "truth"? No one denies that rape occurs. And I have not seen anyone here suggest that rape is not evil.

I am condemned by my own hoist or petard.

[Dancing David]

We are speculating here without many facts. Perhaps it is a definition such as this which is similar to mine. You base your supposition that it is on your knowledge of psychological research. I doubt that a definition such as this would provide such a vast difference between the victim and researchers.



CBL

You should read what Mercutio wrote more carefully, the standard for social science surveys of rape is the legal deinition of rape.

The use of an objective standard is essential in conductiong science that judges behavior. The variable defintion of behaviors as 'rape' or not rape us very susupect, which is why the subjective definition that you propose, would be considered a very poor protocol for most rape surveys. Social science is already aware of the variability of word definitions.

And your assumption is incorrect, it is well established in very good research upon the reporting of rape that victims will not use the objective defintion, you can ask them if they were raped and they will say no. Then you ask them a number of very specific ojective defintions:

Was force used?
-Were there verbal threats?
-Were you restrained?
-Was access to the door or phone blocked?
Did you feel coerced?
Did you say no and the act continueed?
(These are short hand questions, survey questions are more carefully crafted to avoid the definition ambiguity.)

And then frequently the victim will state yes to a question which would indicate that the acts rose to the level of legal rape.

[Dancing David]

While verbal or emotional coercion is a pretty lame way to get someone to have sex with you, I agree that these things do not constitute rape. Some research would include it under a blanket term "sexual aggression," but when it does so the distinction between these acts and rape is made very clear. Like your definition, force or threat of force is typically the deciding factor.




This would seem to beg the queston:

What level of emotional or verbal coersions rises to the level of a threat?

[Metullus]

I should have used maye rather than suppose in my statement, I take it to mean a level of doubt in my assumptions, which seems to be used differently by you.
What I meant to convey was that experience is what it is and that I do not doubt that your experience is what you have claimed. Just as my experience says that purchasing a lottery ticket is futile; others, who were fortunate enough to have won the lottery, would disagree. I hope that you did not interpret my comment as doubting your veracity - I did not and do not.

And again I am not using a legal definition of society, I am using a more cultural aggergate definition, of the collective behavior of individuals.
I am not certain what you mean by "legal definition of society". What I mean is that the laws enforced in a democracy are largely a reflection of the values and mores of the people that make up that democracy; they are a reflection of the society underlying that democracy. These laws come into existance as a result of the collective action of the individuals that make up our society.

The behavior of a minority subset of a society is not necessarily representative of the majority. To judge the majority by the actions of the minority cannot be counted upon to to provide a reasonable understanding of the majority. It seems from your comments that you equate the behaviors of the subset with the values of our society overall - this is not, I suggest, a reasonable tack to take.

It would seem that our estimations differ
Yes it would.

I just preffered to teach by daughter some of the pressure techniques and then how to slap an ear, but I wish that the informal social network did not try to cover rape.
There may well be "informal social network[s]" that try to cover up rapes, but there is no evidence that I am aware of that such behavior is the norm in our society. There are "informal social networks" that cover up all sorts of crimes - these are called family and friends.

Two towns , one sevety thousand, another tirtyfive and a college of 44,000, so larger that Springfield, taken togther.
I have a problem with the police arefusing to take reports from women alleging rape. In the twenty or so cases of which you are aware is there any common thread that would indicate why it is that the police did not investigate?


Idiots, creeps and slimy perps are contibutors to the collective aggregate of individuals. The social definition of society is the one I use.
I agree that idiots, creeps, and slimy perps form a part of the melange that is our society, but I do not think that they define us. I gather that we do not agree on this.

[Dancing David]

What I meant to convey was that experience is what it is and that I do not doubt that your experience is what you have claimed. Just as my experience says that purchasing a lottery ticket is futile; others, who were fortunate enough to have won the lottery, would disagree. I hope that you did not interpret my comment as doubting your veracity - I did not and do not.

Not my impression at all, I meant that when I said that I suppose we are different people I had a level of doubt as to my statement.


I am not certain what you mean by "legal definition of society". What I mean is that the laws enforced in a democracy are largely a reflection of the values and mores of the people that make up that democracy; they are a reflection of the society underlying that democracy. These laws come into existance as a result of the collective action of the individuals that make up our society.

I mean that laws may be the formal network definition that are set by the formal structures which manifest the power and economics of a collective. Often however the behavior of individuals can have a very strong impact that is not the intenet of the law.

Take a related area of law enforcement: domestiv violence.(I will seriously try not to engage in hyperbole this time.)
There are laws in every state that are meant to protect the vidtims of domestic violence, if we start at the most extreme example of the effect of an idividual in the interaction, then let us choose the not common male who is a victim of physical domestic violence. When they tell family and friends they are likely to face ridicule, if they try to make a report the dispathcher may say that 'you don't really want me to call an officer off patrol for that do you', etc.. Then if we examine the bahavior of law enforcement in the more common situations, the scenario is writ upon a larger scale more frequently. There are rural areas and populations where the law enforcement officials are less likely to take reports of domestic violence. There are state's attorneys who are very likely to plea a domestic battery to a simple battery. In the county where I work the court, as exemplified by the state's attorney will not consider oreders of protection unless there is a police report that involves an allegation of physical violence. And this is in direct contradiction of the statute which states that the victim must simply have a reasonable fear of domestic violence and that there is evidence sufficient to issue an emergency order of protection.
These are examples of how law is affected to create a society that states on thing legaly and does another individualy.

Please do not get me wrong, I have great respect for all officers of the courts and the law. My job is needful of thier support and I feel that I could never do thier jobs. There are the majority of situations where people do behave responsibly and wisely often in the face of risk and loss of job. I am not faulting any one for thier choices in enforcing the law and I truely respect all officers of the law and courts.


The behavior of a minority subset of a society is not necessarily representative of the majority. To judge the majority by the actions of the minority cannot be counted upon to to provide a reasonable understanding of the majority. It seems from your comments that you equate the behaviors of the subset with the values of our society overall - this is not, I suggest, a reasonable tack to take.

I may be more aware of the failings of the system and the societal barriers that victims face. Or I could be exegerating the acts of the minority, if we dismiss out right turning the other way( to not see) and denial of victims as victims.

There may well be "informal social network[s]" that try to cover up rapes, but there is no evidence that I am aware of that such behavior is the norm in our society. There are "informal social networks" that cover up all sorts of crimes - these are called family and friends.

You may be blessed to be involved solely in social networkd that don't tolerate victimization of victims. And given my past history of three years as a domestiv violence worker, I have exageratted ideas

I have a problem with the police arefusing to take reports from women alleging rape. In the twenty or so cases of which you are aware is there any common thread that would indicate why it is that the police did not investigate?

this was from a university study conducted by the office of student affairs of a small sample of the male and female students at the university, they reported that there were ten reported assaults of drunk people identified in the survey. I don't beleieve that they asked about the prevalence of a police reports.




I agree that idiots, creeps, and slimy perps form a part of the melange that is our society, but I do not think that they define us. I gather that we do not agree on this.

I don't believe that they define us, I belive that there are very subtle forces at play amongst all the members of society. I have heard people talk as though as thirteen year old girl who became involved in semi consensual sex with one of her father's friends discussed as though she was equally culable of making an informed choice. That kind of behavior is not limited to slime balls and thier friends.

[Metullus]

Not my impression at all, I meant that when I said that I suppose we are different people I had a level of doubt as to my statement.
I am glad that I was misreading your comment. Common ground is firm ground, as my father was wont to say, and makes discussion far less difficult.

I mean that laws may be the formal network definition that are set by the formal structures which manifest the power and economics of a collective.
I understand perfectly.

Often however the behavior of individuals can have a very strong impact that is not the intenet of the law.

Take a related area of law enforcement: domestiv violence.(I will seriously try not to engage in hyperbole this time.)
There are laws in every state that are meant to protect the vidtims of domestic violence, if we start at the most extreme example of the effect of an idividual in the interaction, then let us choose the not common male who is a victim of physical domestic violence. When they tell family and friends they are likely to face ridicule, if they try to make a report the dispathcher may say that 'you don't really want me to call an officer off patrol for that do you', etc.. Then if we examine the bahavior of law enforcement in the more common situations, the scenario is writ upon a larger scale more frequently. There are rural areas and populations where the law enforcement officials are less likely to take reports of domestic violence. There are state's attorneys who are very likely to plea a domestic battery to a simple battery.
My experience has been that PAs are almost always willing to plea bargain if only to insure conviction and reduce case load. This is little different from civil cases that settle out of court - in other words, a business decision is made.

In the county where I work the court, as exemplified by the state's attorney will not consider oreders of protection unless there is a police report that involves an allegation of physical violence. And this is in direct contradiction of the statute which states that the victim must simply have a reasonable fear of domestic violence and that there is evidence sufficient to issue an emergency order of protection.
My understanding is that this occurs largely because of the difficulty in establishing whether or not there is "a reasonable fear of domestic violence". A police report at least gives something to present to the court, and provides a record of behavior. I don't see this as ignoring the problem, but as a "due process" issue. Otherwise every person involved in a child custody dispute, for example, could obtain a restraining order against his/her spouse that would effectively divorce the spouse from his/her children.

These are examples of how law is affected to create a society that states on thing legaly and does another individualy.
I don't think that laws are inacted to "create a society"; rather I think that they are inacted to codify a society's primary values.

Please do not get me wrong, I have great respect for all officers of the courts and the law. My job is needful of thier support and I feel that I could never do thier jobs. There are the majority of situations where people do behave responsibly and wisely often in the face of risk and loss of job. I am not faulting any one for thier choices in enforcing the law and I truely respect all officers of the law and courts.
I do not doubt that you have respect for the police and the courts. Nothing I have read that you have written suggests otherwise.

I may be more aware of the failings of the system and the societal barriers that victims face. Or I could be exegerating the acts of the minority, if we dismiss out right turning the other way( to not see) and denial of victims as victims.

You may be blessed to be involved solely in social networkd that don't tolerate victimization of victims. And given my past history of three years as a domestiv violence worker, I have exageratted ideas
I have recently (over the past couple of years) been involved - peripherally - in a domestic violence problem. The ex-wife, an old and dear friend, lives in constant fear of her ex-husband. Her house and car have been repeatedly vandalized, and she believes to a moral certainty that he is responsible. She also has good reason to believe that he has been in the house. When she approached the court with the request that he be restrained from coming near her the court asked her to provide evidence that she has a reasonable fear of him. She has no evidence beyond her word. The judge, while sypathetic, indicated that her word alone was no sufficient to limit the freedom of action of her ex-husband.

Lest there be any misunderstanding: I believe her to be correct. I think that her fears are reasonable. I think the man capable of causing her harm. But I also understand that he is protected by due process as am I. I don't like it, but I understand it.

this was from a university study conducted by the office of student affairs of a small sample of the male and female students at the university, they reported that there were ten reported assaults of drunk people identified in the survey. I don't beleieve that they asked about the prevalence of a police reports.
Okay.

I don't believe that they define us,
Good. We agree.

I belive that there are very subtle forces at play amongst all the members of society.
Okay. But credit the good as well as the bad.

I have heard people talk as though as thirteen year old girl who became involved in semi consensual sex with one of her father's friends discussed as though she was equally culable of making an informed choice. That kind of behavior is not limited to slime balls and thier friends.
What is "semi consensual sex"? Anyone who defends sex between a 13 year old girl and an adult qualifies in my mind as a slime ball.

[Dancing David]

My experience has been that PAs are almost always willing to plea bargain if only to insure conviction and reduce case load. This is little different from civil cases that settle out of court - in other words, a business decision is made.

I am in agreement, but I feel that when you have a crime that is potentialy a felony the second time it is charged, and you have repeated reductions to simple battery. There is something else at play, especialy when it is a SA who won'y accept pleas after you have pled not guilty.(True stories)

My understanding is that this occurs largely because of the difficulty in establishing whether or not there is "a reasonable fear of domestic violence". A police report at least gives something to present to the court, and provides a record of behavior. I don't see this as ignoring the problem, but as a "due process" issue. Otherwise every person involved in a child custody dispute, for example, could obtain a restraining order against his/her spouse that would effectively divorce the spouse from his/her children.

I am specificaly refering to emergency orders of protection, in Illinois the case is set for a plenary hearing and a plenary order can also be issued after the second hearing. The second hearing is solely evidentiary and the respodent has the oppotunity to tesify on thier behalf.
I believe that Illinois statute allows for verbal statements that are credible and from other witnesses to be allowed in a emergent order. There is no requirement of co-oboration by physical evidence. The law specificaly was designed to allow for the potential that verbal threats were the sole force used by the respondant and that there were no coresponding physical acts other than verbal violence.
It could be very likely that the SA is setting a higher standard, but this is also a county where victims often complain that the police will not take the report of domestic violence, sort of like the way it was a long time ago.

So while my impression is that there is such a high level of request for orders and the SA doesn't want to mess with them, it is just an impression. It is also the only county in our district where this is dome, because the law specificaly allows for allegations of verbal violence in issuing an emergency order. Judges do often deny emergent orders, and the plenary sets the usual standard of evidence.

I don't think that laws are inacted to "create a society"; rather I think that they are inacted to codify a society's primary values.

they also do regulate specific conduct that formaly defines social valus, they may or may not define the primary values as well, if we examine Roe vs. Wade, it would seem that there is some controversy between the formal code and the primary vales, al;though Brown vs. Board of Education would be a better example.



I have recently (over the past couple of years) been involved - peripherally - in a domestic violence problem. The ex-wife, an old and dear friend, lives in constant fear of her ex-husband. Her house and car have been repeatedly vandalized, and she believes to a moral certainty that he is responsible. She also has good reason to believe that he has been in the house. When she approached the court with the request that he be restrained from coming near her the court asked her to provide evidence that she has a reasonable fear of him. She has no evidence beyond her word. The judge, while sypathetic, indicated that her word alone was no sufficient to limit the freedom of action of her ex-husband.

I suggest that she set up digital cameras in the vincinity of her house and maybe hire a private detective to monitor her safety.

That is not the way the Illinois statute is written. But it is often interpreted, the assumption in the construction of the statute was that the limitations on the freedom of the respondant are minor in comparison to the potential harm that the plantiff faces.

There is a huge gap in the way that Orders are enforced as well, an order will state very clearly that at no times is the respondant to be within a certain set distance of the individual, police officers often make interesting interpretations regarding the intent of the respondant and refuse to enforce the order. This includes the property restrictions that can be in place because a judge has determined that there is a remedy of keeping the respondant from the house or place of employment.


Lest there be any misunderstanding: I believe her to be correct. I think that her fears are reasonable. I think the man capable of causing her harm. But I also understand that he is protected by due process as am I. I don't like it, but I understand it.

This seems to be a case that is more open to the evidentiary process, I am discussing cases where there is substantial evidence that the respondant has made credible threats in the precense of multiple witnesses and has a history of following through on the threats, all of which can be substantiated. But because there is no police report that alleges current physical harm done to the plantiff, the SA will refuse to allow the petition for the emergency OP.

Okay. But credit the good as well as the bad.

I do, there are just areas where a lot of people still blame the victim. If say they are still 20% or higher of the population, that creates a societal barrier to the victim.

What is "semi consensual sex"? Anyone who defends sex between a 13 year old girl and an adult qualifies in my mind as a slime ball.

This was at a dinner conversation I was at, one of my wife's friends lives in a small town and we were eating dinner with her grandmother, her grand mother's friend and the friends daughter, They were discussing a case where a thirteen year old had engaged in sex with an adult in thier late fifties. They weren't defending the behavior of the convicted, but they were talking as though the behavior of the thirteen year old was suspect.
These are all outstanding and rather nice people.

I say semi consensual just because the thirteen year old was alleged to have done the acts willingly, but we know the age of consent.

[CBL4]

Originally posted by CJ
The discrepancy you see as some kind of ideological slight-of-hand to increase rape statistics is anything but. Rather, it's an observation that forms the basis of a fascinating and important research question: how do rape victims perceive their assault? Are they motivated to label it differently? Why? What purpose does it serve?I expect to see a discrepancy but not a large one. A discrepancy of 50% would surprise me but I would not leap to an immediate conclusion. A discrepancy of 400% is an indication that something strange is going on. I cannot believe that there is no slight of hand going on.

Originally posted by Dancing David[
Was force used?
-Were there verbal threats?
-Were you restrained?
-Was access to the door or phone blocked?
Did you feel coerced?
Did you say no and the act continueed?I realize that these questions were off the top of your head but these are examples of misleading questions. Feeling coerced (as opposed to clear threat) in no way implies rape. Voluntary restraints (e.g. willing bondage) do not constitute rape. No and continuation is a very iffy definition of rape i.e. it does not necessarily indicate rape.

CBL


CBL

[Dancing David]

I expect to see a discrepancy but not a large one. A discrepancy of 50% would surprise me but I would not leap to an immediate conclusion. A discrepancy of 400% is an indication that something strange is going on. I cannot believe that there is no slight of hand going on.

I realize that these questions were off the top of your head but these are examples of misleading questions. Feeling coerced (as opposed to clear threat) in no way implies rape. Voluntary restraints (e.g. willing bondage) do not constitute rape. No and continuation is a very iffy definition of rape i.e. it does not necessarily indicate rape.

CBL


CBL

Uh, if a person holds you down while they force non-consensual sex, as I said the question have to be fine tuned for clarity and usualy are asked a number of times in different forms for consistancy.

Also you have made a blanket defintion of coersion, that does not imply emtional pl;eading, but can include vieled threats , especialy if they are credible threats. Very dangerous arae again. Coersion implies a level of violence in the situation as opposed to persuasion.

You just skated onto the ice with the consent being withdrawn question:
Does consent given the day before count?
Does a consent given in a moment of lirtation count?
Does removing clothing count?
If the victim consents to vaginal/penis sex does that give consent ro anal or oral sex?

A very dangerous area and not iffy in terms of the law.

[Infinite]

How would you not know you were raped? Perhaps, afraid to admit a rape had taken place. Maybe to scared to say anything, or maybe even in denia, I can see. Sometimes the rapist is not violent but just someone who manipulates, drugs or draws the other person into having sex out some sort of fear. If a 13 year old girl has sex with a hot looking male teacher she finds attractive and he seduces her and lures her into a situation she feels too afraid to say no....that would be rape. She might not really feel like she was raped because she felt she found him attractive. Given the age and circumstances...that would be rape.

[JamesDillon]

I do not mean to downplay the fact that about 2.5% percent of the students were raped. This is horrible. But by pretending the other women are too stupid to know if they were raped, this study trivialized the real rapes.

I've only read the opening post, so I don't know what responses have been made already; however, this does happen. I have a close friend, whom I trust, who went on a trip to Puerto Rico a couple of years ago (a virgin at the time) and, a couple of months later, was told that she was pregnant. She still has no recollection of the encounter, but assuming that she didn't abort the Second Coming, it seems quite probable that she was assaulted at some point on the trip.

[Bikewer]

Some time ago I did a post on the "one in four" figure commonly cited for the percentage of female college students who will be "raped" at some time during their (average of) 4-year stint in higher education.

Being in campus law enforcement, it was easy to figure that at my particular school, we should be having several hundred such assaults reported each couple of years. Instead, none. In the last seven years or so, we have had no sexual assaults reported whatever. The last one was a "date rape" situation where the young woman claimed "he got me drunk and had his way with me", while the young man said "we got drunk together and had consensual sex."
There was no prosecution.

Even considering the (still too high) percentage of unreported assaults, we should have had at least dozens of assaults reported during a typical school year.
My analysis from reading some of the flyers put out by the various feminist groups on campus, as well as articles appearing in the student newspaper, is that only by stretching the term "assault" to include "consensual sex that you subsequently regretted" could such a figure be obtained.