JREF Homepage Swift Blog Events Calendar $1 Million Paranormal Challenge The Amaz!ng Meeting Useful Links Support Us
James Randi Educational Foundation JREF Forum
Forum Index Register Members List Events Mark Forums Read Help

Go Back   JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events
Click Here To Donate

Notices


Welcome to the JREF Forum, where we discuss skepticism, critical thinking, the paranormal and science in a friendly but lively way. You are currently viewing the forum as a guest, which means you are missing out on discussing matters that are of interest to you. Please consider registering so you can gain full use of the forum features and interact with other Members. Registration is simple, fast and free! Click here to register today.

Tags rape issues

Reply
Old 7th September 2010, 04:42 PM   #1
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
Schrodinger's Rapist: When is uncritical thought ok?

A female friend sent me this and I'm a little unsure of how I feel about it.

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/gu...t-being-maced/

I think this is bigotry, prejudicial and uncritical, but I'm not sure I have a problem with it...

Is this a good example of weighing social incentives? If a guy is so socially awkward/unaware is it acceptable to treat him as a potential rapist?

Or is this borderline CTer delusion and dishonest use of a statistic? Populating the world with shadow agent boogeyman where every man is a possible rapist, every Arab is a terrorist and every homosexual is a disease vector?
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 05:09 PM   #2
Ryokan
Insert something funny here
 
Ryokan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Norway
Posts: 8,984
Quote:
Is preventing violent assault or murder part of your daily routine, rather than merely something you do when you venture into war zones? Because, for women, it is. When I go on a date, I always leave the man’s full name and contact information written next to my computer monitor. This is so the cops can find my body if I go missing. My best friend will call or e-mail me the next morning, and I must answer that call or e-mail before noon-ish, or she begins to worry. If she doesn’t hear from me by three or so, she’ll call the police. My activities after dark are curtailed. Unless I am in a densely-occupied, well-lit space, I won’t go out alone. Even then, I prefer to have a friend or two, or my dogs, with me.
Paranoia? None of the women I know have never even hinted that this is how they feel.
Ryokan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 05:17 PM   #3
ravdin
Illuminator
 
ravdin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Location: San Francisco, CA
Posts: 4,948
Originally Posted by SatanicSheep View Post
If a guy is so socially awkward/unaware is it acceptable to treat him as a potential rapist?
Yes. If you don't want to creep women out, then don't act creepy.

I was prepared for a man-bashing manifesto when I clicked the link. But the author's precautions seem very sensible to me. Unfortunately, there really are a lot of bad people in the world. Not all of them are men by the way- so if you're a man meeting strange women you ought to be careful as well.
__________________
Take the risk of thinking for yourself. Much more happiness, truth, beauty, and wisdom will come to you that way. -Christopher Hitchens

Believe what you're told. There would be chaos if everyone thought for themselves. -Top Dog slogan
ravdin is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 05:55 PM   #4
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
Well yeah, but it's not simply acting creepy as some people will be creeped out by anything. Having a penis is creepy enough for some (as is wearing a turban etc. etc.)

I didn't think the article was bad either. It just makes me wonder when and where we should draw lines between reliable demograpics and worthless ecological fallacy.
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:18 PM   #5
Dunstan
Illuminator
 
Dunstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Trailer Park
Posts: 4,292
I'm not seeing the "bigotry" or uncritical thinking you allude to in your OP. (I'm not sure about that "1 in 6" statistic, though.)

I suspect the author is a little more (for lack of a better term) cautious than the average woman, but not off the deep end or anything.

I'm a guy, but I have a similar though process when I'm approached by a stranger. Fortunately I don't really have to worry about sexual assault, but I do ask myself whether this person is going to be something less serious like an annoying sales person, an aggressive beggar, a bully spoiling for a fight, or something innocuous like a tourist asking for directions or someone I've met and forgotten.
Dunstan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:21 PM   #6
kerikiwi
Philosopher
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: Bay of Islands NZ
Posts: 6,139
The 1 in 6 women being sexually assaulted is very suspect.
Paranoia.
I wonder how she copes with motor transport and ham sandwiches.
kerikiwi is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:24 PM   #7
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Folsom Prison
Posts: 8,284
Originally Posted by SatanicSheep View Post
I think this is bigotry, prejudicial and uncritical, but I'm not sure I have a problem with it...

Is this a good example of weighing social incentives? If a guy is so socially awkward/unaware is it acceptable to treat him as a potential rapist?

Or is this borderline CTer delusion and dishonest use of a statistic? Populating the world with shadow agent boogeyman where every man is a possible rapist, every Arab is a terrorist and every homosexual is a disease vector?
Welcome to the world of Male Privilege. I see nothing bigoted or prejudicial about it. Here are some facts about date rape:
  • 1 in 4 college women have either been raped or suffered attempted rape.
  • 84% of the women who are raped knew their assailants.
  • 57% of the rapes occurred on a date.
  • Women ages 16-24 have 4 times higher risk of being raped than any other population group.
  • 1 in 12 male students surveyed had committed acts that met the legal definition of rape.
  • 16% of male students who had committed rape took part in episodes with more than one attacker's gang rape.
  • 75% of male students and 55% of female students involved in date rape had been drunk or using drugs.
  • 33% of males surveyed said that they would commit rape if they could escape detection.
  • 25% of men surveyed believed that rape was acceptable if: the woman asks the man out; or the man pays for the date; or the woman goes back to the man's room after the date.

Citations are in the link.

So, do you really think that women are being paranoid? I don't, and instead am astonished at how much men are still able to get away with regarding sexual aggressiveness.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:27 PM   #8
Loss Leader
Opinionated Jerk
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 15,622
I don't think her essay shows a lack of critical thinking skills. She seems to be very deliberate in her thinking - weighing danger against opportunity.

If she makes a mistake, it's that the algorhithm she's using is incorrect. She wildly overestimates the danger of being raped by a stranger. It's actually pretty low compared to "date" or "acquaintance" rape. The guy who tries to talk to her on the subway is far, far less of a threat than Jerry from accounting at the Christmas party.

She also suffers from living in New York. The forced physical closeness in that city makes everyone paranoid.

In need of a calming weekend at an upstate spa? Yes. Illogical? No.
__________________
"I recognize the problem ... but I was sort of hoping that no one would consider the issue important enough to bring up." Jabba


Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:32 PM   #9
John Jones
Philosopher
 
John Jones's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Iowa, USA
Posts: 6,564
Quote:
1 in 4 college women have either been raped or suffered attempted rape.
Suspicious.
John Jones is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:42 PM   #10
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Folsom Prison
Posts: 8,284
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Suspicious.
Well, I'm convinced.

Here are broader statistics. The likelihood for college women is higher, and considering the greater amount of risky behavior college students engage in. So, what's the basis for your incredulity?
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:51 PM   #11
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
I only wonder if it's bigoted or uncritical becuase of the possibility of ecologically fallacious stereotyping. Saying that because X percentage of a group does something that 100% of that group is suspect and should be treated as such.

I'm sure statistics could be dug up to paint a picture that black people are more prone to criminality than whites (which I don't believe, but an easy distortion could be made.) and therefore deserve to be treated with greater apprehension. Is there anyone who would not consider that prejudice?
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:52 PM   #12
Loss Leader
Opinionated Jerk
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 15,622
Originally Posted by GreNME View Post
Well, I'm convinced.

Here are broader statistics. The likelihood for college women is higher, and considering the greater amount of risky behavior college students engage in. So, what's the basis for your incredulity?

The basis of *my* incredulity is the definition of attempted sexual assault. There's a great deal of difference between: 1) having a guy press his penis against you and only escaping because you dig your thumb into his eye; and 2) having a guy you're not into lean in for a kiss and you turning your head and him leaving.

I'm worried that the instruments used to develop some of these statistics are not measuring the correct thing. The question, 'Have you ever been subject to an unwanted sexual advance?" does not seem well-designed.

I'd like for all of the stats about sexual assault to start with a consistent definition of terms at the very least.

This is not to say that sexual assaults against women are not a real and persistent problem or that they are undeserving of public attention. All women have the right to feel and be physically safe at all times.*


*I would still lean in on Natalie Portman. She can turn her head and I'll leave, but dammit I'm gonna try.
__________________
"I recognize the problem ... but I was sort of hoping that no one would consider the issue important enough to bring up." Jabba


Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 06:57 PM   #13
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Folsom Prison
Posts: 8,284
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
The basis of *my* incredulity is the definition of attempted sexual assault. There's a great deal of difference between: 1) having a guy press his penis against you and only escaping because you dig your thumb into his eye; and 2) having a guy you're not into lean in for a kiss and you turning your head and him leaving.
I think the majority of what would be considered "attempted" rape falls closer to the former than the latter in breakdowns I've seen describing the classification. I still don't see the reason for the incredulity, as if the default assumption is "does not happen" when over and over it's demonstrably happening quite often.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 07:01 PM   #14
Furcifer
miscreant
 
Furcifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hohm
Posts: 13,379
Originally Posted by SatanicSheep View Post
A female friend sent me this and I'm a little unsure of how I feel about it.

http://kateharding.net/2009/10/08/gu...t-being-maced/

I think this is bigotry, prejudicial and uncritical, but I'm not sure I have a problem with it...

Is this a good example of weighing social incentives? If a guy is so socially awkward/unaware is it acceptable to treat him as a potential rapist?

Or is this borderline CTer delusion and dishonest use of a statistic? Populating the world with shadow agent boogeyman where every man is a possible rapist, every Arab is a terrorist and every homosexual is a disease vector?
It seems a little inconsistent with what I've experienced in dating and then leans a little heavily on interpreting behaviour as "creepy". Some women enjoy the pursuit and some women like tattoos (although none seem to be impressed with Buffalo Breath)

I don't think most women feel the same way and certainly don't default to "he's a potential rapist if he deviates from my idea of how things should proceed".

If it works for her then it works for her. My guess is that it has a much higher probability of leading to missed opportunities in relationships than preventing a possible rape.

It seemed like a rational argument, but I had the feeling it bordered on paranoia as well. She seemed to be speaking about her own particular experience that wasn't necessarily par for the course. In that case prevention could easily be mistaken for paranoia.

It's a sad commentary on society when that type of thinking could be considered prevention though. It's not fair.

Last edited by Furcifer; 7th September 2010 at 07:54 PM.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 07:15 PM   #15
Dunstan
Illuminator
 
Dunstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Trailer Park
Posts: 4,292
Originally Posted by SatanicSheep View Post
I only wonder if it's bigoted or uncritical becuase of the possibility of ecologically fallacious stereotyping. Saying that because X percentage of a group does something that 100% of that group is suspect and should be treated as such.
Premise 1: Some men are rapists.
Premise 2: It is impossible to tell from looking at a man with certainty whether or not he is a rapist.
Premise 3: X is a man.
Conclusion: X could be a rapist.

Where's the fallacy?

It seems to me that you're committing the fallacy, by insisting that women should ignore the possibility that a particular man is a rapist because you find it offensive.

Quote:
I'm sure statistics could be dug up to paint a picture that black people are more prone to criminality than whites (which I don't believe, but an easy distortion could be made.) and therefore deserve to be treated with greater apprehension. Is there anyone who would not consider that prejudice?
If people were accurately assessing the hypothetical differences in crime rates, after adjusting for the locality, the age, dress, mannerisms, and other available evidence other than skin color, and this hypothetical difference was truly significant enough to justify acting differently, and wasn't being used to violate civil rights laws, then I'd have no problem with it. I consider that highly unlikely.
Dunstan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 07:29 PM   #16
Madalch
The Jester
 
Madalch's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: The wet coast.
Posts: 9,444
I'll add my voice to those saying the article seems reasonable.

Although I, too, think the phrase "unwanted sexual advance" leaves a lot of grey area.
__________________
As the size of an explosion increases, the number of social situations it is incapable of resolving approaches zero. -Vaarsuvius
It's a rum state of affairs when you feel like punching a jar of mayonnaise in the face. -Charlie Brooker
Madalch is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 07:57 PM   #17
Loss Leader
Opinionated Jerk
Moderator
 
Loss Leader's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: New York
Posts: 15,622
So, everybody's agreed then? Me trying to kiss Natalie Portman after, say, a very friendly lunch and a lingering handshake at the car, is perfectly acceptable?
__________________
"I recognize the problem ... but I was sort of hoping that no one would consider the issue important enough to bring up." Jabba


Follow me on Twitter! @LossLeader
Loss Leader is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 07:58 PM   #18
GreNME
Philosopher
 
GreNME's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: Folsom Prison
Posts: 8,284
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
So, everybody's agreed then? Me trying to kiss Natalie Portman after, say, a very friendly lunch and a lingering handshake at the car, is perfectly acceptable?
Unless she jams a thumb in your eye and runs away, I say go for it.
__________________
Like love, criminals will always find a way. -- foxholeatheist

The kind of pacifism I endorse is brought about by eliminating one enemy combatant at a time.-- JoeyDonuts
GreNME is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 08:02 PM   #19
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Dunstan View Post
Premise 1: Some men are rapists.
Premise 2: It is impossible to tell from looking at a man with certainty whether or not he is a rapist.
Premise 3: X is a man.
Conclusion: X could be a rapist.

Where's the fallacy?

It seems to me that you're committing the fallacy, by insisting that women should ignore the possibility that a particular man is a rapist because you find it offensive.
I'm not really insistant or offended by anything here. I wanted opinions on if this was an inference fallacy, because her conclusion and actions are a little more strongly worded than "X could be a rapist" and if this was logical. You seem to be of the opinion that there's a reasonable way to profile people and that this is an example of that.

I was curious if people considered this a logical or illogical inference. There's really no reason to "welcome me" to the world of male privelege or assume that I think this woman is paranoid/over reacting for prejudging individuals.
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 08:09 PM   #20
johnny karate
... and your little dog too.
 
johnny karate's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Posts: 8,854
Originally Posted by Loss Leader View Post
So, everybody's agreed then? Me trying to kiss Natalie Portman after, say, a very friendly lunch and a lingering handshake at the car, is perfectly acceptable?
Not to me it isn't.

I saw her first.
__________________
Lost your faith in humanity?

Click here to have it restored.

Or here.
johnny karate is online now   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 08:12 PM   #21
Lyrandar
Thinker
 
Lyrandar's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 213
I think some of what the blogger listed as "do not disturb" cues will depend a lot on the individual person. Obviously I may have some trouble speaking for how any woman is going to act, since I'm not one, but a lot of times when I do things like read a book or work on my computer in public, I'd actually be really happy if someone showed an interest in what I was doing.

Other than that, yeah. It's a bit depressing and certainly not right, but I feel like a fair number of my male friends don't understand how hurtful rape can be and how important it is to be very careful. Even worse, a few of them like to start blaming the victim when they hear stories about people that were raped. ("Friends", by the way, is being very, very loosely used here. "Acquaintances" might be better.)
Lyrandar is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 08:31 PM   #22
gnome
Penultimate Amazing
 
gnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2001
Posts: 10,321
I think that people are afraid of being considered among those statistics if they make an advance on someone and get rejected. That's really not what this would be about.

You pass into "creep" territory when the person you're approaching makes a clear expression that she would like to be left alone by you, and you persist in your advances. You pass into sexual assault territory when your persistence gets physical.

The lines are really not so hard to define, are they?
__________________

gnome is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 09:30 PM   #23
pitbone
Student
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 28
Quote:
Premise 1: Some men are rapists.
Premise 2: It is impossible to tell from looking at a man with certainty whether or not he is a rapist.
Premise 3: X is a man.
Conclusion: X could be a rapist.

Where's the fallacy?
"X could be a rapist" isn't really the conclusion the writer comes to. "I am justified in treating X as a potential rapist" is the conclusion. I read it as a non-sequitur, but inference fallacy is probably more apt.

According to the writers statistics and the additional data from GreNME, both of which are more than 10 years old, a women is not justified in believing an unknown male will sexually assault them. Based on the data they've provided I see three problems with the conclusion:

1) Statistically most women will not be raped.

87.5% of women, according to the writer's figure. How is this data skewed by women who are taking unnecessary risks? eg. Getting hammered then going home with a complete stranger. This type of behaviour no doubt increases the occurrence of rape compared to an society of sensible women.

Lest I be accused of being a rape apologist, I'm not even remotely insinuating that women deserve to get raped for getting drunk and going home with a stranger, or that any guy who takes advantage of such a situation is anything other than a morally bankrupt scumbag. It's deplorable that rape ever happens. I'm simply saying that such behaviour has been known to increase the chance of rape and in a society where no one engaged in said behaviour, the statistical occurrence of rape would likely be lower.

2) Statistically, the vast majority of men do not commit rape.

Treating all men as potential rapists can't necessarily be justified, seeing as the assumption will be wrong most of the time.

3) According to the source provided by GreNME, "Historically, females have been most often victimized by someone they knew."

This further invalidates using a blanket statistic against unknown men. Using a similar source as the blog author, this means 97% (give or take) of women won't be sexually assaulted by a stranger.


Given that the odds of dying from cancer are 1 in 7, I have to wonder if the author is just as thorough in screening herself from every potential carcinogenic substance she comes in contact with. I point this out because the whole blog entry seemed a bit paranoid to me. If it were on a different subject, like cancer prevention, it strikes me that it would seem a bit hysterical.

I'd also like to present the following adaptation to the syllogism above:

Premise 1: Some Muslims are terrorists.
Premise 2: It is impossible to tell from looking at a Muslims with certainty whether or not he/she is a terrorist.
Premise 3: X is a Muslim.
Conclusion: X could be a terrorist.

Is this argument sound? Is a person justified is taking the conclusion as the default stance? If not, what changes the validity? (These aren't rhetorical, I have an opinion and am interested in what others think.)

One final beef, which is really nitpicky. I'm sure there was some amount of jest when selecting the title of "Schrödinger's Rapist," but it was used so verbosely throughout the article, it kind of got on my nerves. Making the Schrödinger reference, whether intentional or not, alludes to the involvement of random probability; that all women are equally likely to get raped and all men are equally likely to rape them. This is not the case.

[/criticism]

I do think there's some good advice in the article and would likely impart some similar points to my children before sending them off to college.
pitbone is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 09:52 PM   #24
Dunstan
Illuminator
 
Dunstan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Sunnyvale Trailer Park
Posts: 4,292
Originally Posted by pitbone View Post
"X could be a rapist" isn't really the conclusion the writer comes to. "I am justified in treating X as a potential rapist" is the conclusion.
I'm not seeing the difference between those two statements.

Quote:
I read it as a non-sequitur, but inference fallacy is probably more apt.

According to the writers statistics and the additional data from GreNME, both of which are more than 10 years old, a women is not justified in believing an unknown male will sexually assault them.
So what? The author's claim isn't that an unknown male will assault them, only that he could.

Quote:
Based on the data they've provided I see three problems with the conclusion:

1) Statistically most women will not be raped.

87.5% of women, according to the writer's figure. How is this data skewed by women who are taking unnecessary risks? eg. Getting hammered then going home with a complete stranger. This type of behaviour no doubt increases the occurrence of rape compared to an society of sensible women.

Lest I be accused of being a rape apologist, I'm not even remotely insinuating that women deserve to get raped for getting drunk and going home with a stranger, or that any guy who takes advantage of such a situation is anything other than a morally bankrupt scumbag. It's deplorable that rape ever happens. I'm simply saying that such behaviour has been known to increase the chance of rape and in a society where no one engaged in said behaviour, the statistical occurrence of rape would likely be lower.

2) Statistically, the vast majority of men do not commit rape.

Treating all men as potential rapists can't necessarily be justified, seeing as the assumption will be wrong most of the time.
Non sequitur. You seem to be assuming that "this man is a potential rapist" is equivalent to "this man has a >50% likelihood of being a rapist."

Gun safety instructors will tell you that you should "treat every gun as if it was loaded." It doesn't matter if you personally unloaded the thing two seconds ago, you still don't wave it around or point it at anything you don't intend to kill. Is that a bad way to think simply because most of the time the gun you think is unloaded is, in fact, unloaded?

The author isn't saying that every time a strange man approaches her, she hits him with pepper spray, dials 911 and yells RAPE! She's saying (1) that she exercises caution; and (2) that men should consider when they approach women the fact that women have to worry about these things, and so a considerate man -- or simply one who wishes his advances to be received positively -- will do his best to be non-threatening.

Quote:
3) According to the source provided by GreNME, "Historically, females have been most often victimized by someone they knew."

This further invalidates using a blanket statistic against unknown men. Using a similar source as the blog author, this means 97% (give or take) of women won't be sexually assaulted by a stranger.
Great. Most drunk drivers make it home safely. Doesn't mean it's a good idea.

Quote:
Given that the odds of dying from cancer are 1 in 7, I have to wonder if the author is just as thorough in screening herself from every potential carcinogenic substance she comes in contact with. I point this out because the whole blog entry seemed a bit paranoid to me. If it were on a different subject, like cancer prevention, it strikes me that it would seem a bit hysterical.
The part about not going out at night without her dogs strikes me as a little conservative, but let's put that aside. What did the author really say she does about her concerns? She doesn't say that she refuses to talk to any male strangers.

Quote:
I'd also like to present the following adaptation to the syllogism above:

Premise 1: Some Muslims are terrorists.
Premise 2: It is impossible to tell from looking at a Muslims with certainty whether or not he/she is a terrorist.
Premise 3: X is a Muslim.
Conclusion: X could be a terrorist.

Is this argument sound?
Sure. Change "Muslim" to any other religion (or "atheist") and it would also be sound. The question is, what does the speaker propose to do about it?

Quote:
Is a person justified is taking the conclusion as the default stance? If not, what changes the validity? (These aren't rhetorical, I have an opinion and am interested in what others think.)
If someone wants to argue that "therefore, we shouldn't let X on this plane," then I have a problem with it. But this author isn't doing the equivalent of that. She isn't demanding that the civil rights of men be curtailed in any way. She's not saying "men suck." She's just saying, hey guys, here's something that women generally worry about that guys generally don't, and you might want to take it into account in your dealings with women.

Last edited by Dunstan; 7th September 2010 at 09:54 PM.
Dunstan is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:17 PM   #25
Eric D
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 486
"While you may assume that none of the men you know are rapists, I can assure you that at least one is."

This is bogus. I call bull (sigh) pocky just because of that statement alone.
Eric D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:27 PM   #26
Modified
Illuminator
 
Modified's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: SW Florida
Posts: 4,664
Originally Posted by John Jones View Post
Suspicious.
Well, it sounds low to me. Maybe I went to the wrong college or knew the wrong sort of girls, and it was twenty years ago so maybe things have improved since then.
Modified is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:31 PM   #27
bynmdsue
Graduate Poster
 
bynmdsue's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2007
Posts: 1,866
Is it rape if she has one too many drinks and regrets it the next day?
bynmdsue is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:36 PM   #28
Eric D
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by bynmdsue View Post
Is it rape if she has one too many drinks and regrets it the next day?
No.
Eric D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:42 PM   #29
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 18,283
Originally Posted by GreNME View Post
Well, I'm convinced.

Here are broader statistics. The likelihood for college women is higher, and considering the greater amount of risky behavior college students engage in. So, what's the basis for your incredulity?
1 in 6? Don't about 1 in 6 people also report having been abducted by aliens?

Here's one reason to be suspicious

This link shows a conviction that the alleged victim, Biurny Peguero, admitted she made up to get some sympathy from her friends and as an excuse for ditching them.

If a person can falsely believe that they've been abducted by aliens, they could falsely believe that they've been raped. Or they might say it for attention or sympathy, like Biurny Peguero.
__________________
“Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:54 PM   #30
Furcifer
miscreant
 
Furcifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hohm
Posts: 13,379
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
If a person can falsely believe that they've been abducted by aliens, they could falsely believe that they've been raped. Or they might say it for attention or sympathy, like Biurny Peguero.
I seem to recall there was a study done on this "Buyers remorse". There was a tendency for the women to report being sexually assaulted when they hadn't because it made them seem more pure to their friends.

It was only when there was no consequence to the claim, obviously not something they reported to the police, but something their were inclined to do in private.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 10:55 PM   #31
Eric D
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 486
The author of this article claims that men, if their appearance is shabby, shouldn't approach women in public and try online dating? That's some real bullpocky.

Is there any evidence that men with poor hygiene and "cockroach tattoos" are more likely to be rapists, or is the author just extra creeped out by guys who aren't her type?
Eric D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:03 PM   #32
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 18,283
Originally Posted by 3bodyproblem View Post
I seem to recall there was a study done on this "Buyers remorse". There was a tendency for the women to report being sexually assaulted when they hadn't because it made them seem more pure to their friends.

It was only when there was no consequence to the claim, obviously not something they reported to the police, but something their were inclined to do in private.
Sounds plausible to me. Anyway, my main point is that you can't trust surveys. 1 in 6 believe that Obama is a muslim, 1 in 6 believe in UFOs, 1 in 6 think the sun goes around the earth, 1 in 6 think they have seen a ghost, etc.

Originally Posted by Eric D View Post
The author of this article claims that men, if their appearance is shabby, shouldn't approach women in public and try online dating? That's some real bullpocky.

Is there any evidence that men with poor hygiene and "cockroach tattoos" are more likely to be rapists, or is the author just extra creeped out by guys who aren't her type?
Is any woman into men with poor hygiene?
__________________
“Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:04 PM   #33
SOdhner
Muse
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 837
Originally Posted by pitbone View Post
How is this data skewed by women who are taking unnecessary risks? eg. Getting hammered then going home with a complete stranger. This type of behaviour no doubt increases the occurrence of rape compared to an society of sensible women.

[...]

such behaviour has been known to increase the chance of rape
That's my cue! I'll go ahead and avoid specifically calling you a rape apologist and stick with pointing out that you are victim blaming. Women should be able to get as drunk as they want and go wherever they want with whoever they want without you making comments about how they are not sensible and are increasing rape. You know what increases rape? Raping people.

Talking about "unnecessary risks" brings to mind things like chainsaw juggling. Instead, you mention something that men can do without any real concern. That's male privilege (and yes, I love it). We get to do things like get smashed around strangers without worrying that not only will we get raped but then people will blame it on us for not being sensible. It is BECAUSE of that that we need articles like this one to remind us that women don't have this luxury and we should keep that in mind when approaching them.

In other words, the article is for you.

Last edited by SOdhner; 7th September 2010 at 11:21 PM.
SOdhner is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:12 PM   #34
Eric D
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 486
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post


Is any woman into men with poor hygiene?
Most will say otherwise, but I suspect they are secretly turned on by a man's sweaty grossness.
Eric D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:22 PM   #35
Furcifer
miscreant
 
Furcifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hohm
Posts: 13,379
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
That's my cue! I'll go ahead and avoid specifically calling you a rape apologist and stick with pointing out that you are victim blaming. Women should be able to get as drunk as they want and go wherever they want with whoever they want without you making comments about how they are not sensible and are increasing rape. You know what increases rape? Raping people.
Whoah, that's a little harsh.

People do things they don't remember doing when they get too drunk. It's entirely possible to get "black out drunk", do something "unsensible" or out of character and not recall doing it. It's also well known that alcohol reduces inhibitions. That's a dangerous combination.

I don't think anyone should get "as drunk as they want". Surely you don't mean that
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:22 PM   #36
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by Dunstan View Post
Gun safety instructors will tell you that you should "treat every gun as if it was loaded." It doesn't matter if you personally unloaded the thing two seconds ago, you still don't wave it around or point it at anything you don't intend to kill. Is that a bad way to think simply because most of the time the gun you think is unloaded is, in fact, unloaded?
This is what I ask in the thread title. Maybe not bad but is it really being critical?
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:25 PM   #37
Puppycow
Penultimate Amazing
 
Puppycow's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: Japan
Posts: 18,283
Originally Posted by Eric D View Post
Most will say otherwise, but I suspect they are secretly turned on by a man's sweaty grossness.
__________________
“Some men are born mediocre, some men achieve mediocrity, and some men have mediocrity thrust upon them. With Major Major it had been all three.”
― Joseph Heller, Catch-22
Puppycow is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:26 PM   #38
SatanicSheep
Thinker
 
SatanicSheep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Posts: 245
Originally Posted by SOdhner View Post
Instead, you mention something that men can do without any real concern. That's male privilege (and yes, I love it). We get to do things like get smashed around strangers without worrying that not only will we get raped but then people will blame it on us for not being sensible. It is BECAUSE of that that we need articles like this one to remind us that women don't have this luxury and we should keep that in mind when approaching them.

In other words, the article is for you.
Men can and do in fact get raped. It's just much less likely that it would happen to a man.

For the author of the article it doesn't matter. Even when she admits the probality of being raped is much lower (being in church and knowing the guy's mother) she operates as if it hasn't changed. Is it unwise? Maybe not, but again; is it really thinking critically? Is it fair?

Last edited by SatanicSheep; 7th September 2010 at 11:30 PM.
SatanicSheep is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:38 PM   #39
Furcifer
miscreant
 
Furcifer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: hohm
Posts: 13,379
Originally Posted by Puppycow View Post
Sounds plausible to me. Anyway, my main point is that you can't trust surveys. 1 in 6 believe that Obama is a muslim, 1 in 6 believe in UFOs, 1 in 6 think the sun goes around the earth, 1 in 6 think they have seen a ghost, etc.
Agreed.

A quick check gives 0.301 reported rapes per 1000 people in the US. I found a quote that say only 16% of rapes and sexual assaults are reported

(which is still disgustingly high)

A conservative estimate is 0.19% of women have been raped. That's considerably less than the 25% reported in the survey.
Furcifer is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Old 7th September 2010, 11:45 PM   #40
Eric D
Critical Thinker
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 486
Should women acknowledge that men are concerned with being wrongfully accused of rape, and thus be careful of how they approach men? Should I treat every woman I meet as a potential threat? After all, she could ruin my life.
Eric D is offline   Quote this post in a PM   Nominate this post for this month's language award Copy a direct link to this post Reply With Quote Back to Top
Reply

JREF Forum » General Topics » Social Issues & Current Events

Bookmarks

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 07:35 PM.
Powered by vBulletin. Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
© 2001-2013, James Randi Educational Foundation. All Rights Reserved.

Disclaimer: Messages posted in the Forum are solely the opinion of their authors.