Likelihood of Rape

[fls]

Yes, this refers to Elevatorgate. No, you don't have to know or care about it to answer the poll.

The set-up is that a one man and one woman are on an elevator at 4 in the morning in a hotel.

I posed this question to TraneWreck in another thread and I wanted to get some additional opinions. If you feel compelled to explain your response, please consider using spoiler tags.

Thanks.

[Complexity]

Errr... what poll?

ETA: Must be the first or last option, because the second and third options are subsumed by the first.

I voted for the first option.

[fls]

Originally Posted by Complexity

Errr... what poll?

Sorry. You don't get to make the poll until after the thread has been started, so there's always a bit of a delay.

Linda

[ImaginalDisc]

So the assumption is that the rapist is the man?

[ehcks]

Maybe I'm an optimist, or maybe I hate this topic, but I don't see rape as likely in any of those.

Also, most elevators have security cameras. Terrible place to do anything illegal.

[blobru]

Not sure the distinction between the first choice -- "a woman is on an elevator with a man" -- and the next two? Is it:

1. (no conversation)
2. (conversation with proposition)
3. (conversation without proposition)?

[fls]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

So the assumption is that the rapist is the man?

Yes.

Linda

[USEagle13]

Originally Posted by fls

Yes, this refers to Elevatorgate. No, you don't have to know or care about it to answer the poll.

The set-up is that a one man and one woman are on an elevator at 4 in the morning in a hotel.

I posed this question to TraneWreck in another thread and I wanted to get some additional opinions. If you feel compelled to explain your response, please consider using spoiler tags.

Thanks.

Was pretty biased poll as 2 of the options were pretty much the same thing. Almost seemed like some sort of feminist type thingy.

[ImaginalDisc]

Originally Posted by fls

Yes.

Linda

Why?

[fls]

Originally Posted by blobru

Not sure the distinction between the first choice -- "a woman is on an elevator with a man" -- and the next two? Is it:

1. (no conversation)
2. (conversation with proposition)
3. (conversation without proposition)?

There may or may not be conversation with the first option. You're just getting more information with the second and third option that you don't get with the first.

Linda

[fls]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

Why?

You can answer as though either can be the rapist, if you prefer.

Linda

[Pup]

Originally Posted by Complexity

Must be the first or last option, because the second and third options are subsumed by the first.

What he said.

[ImaginalDisc]

Originally Posted by fls

You can answer as though either can be the rapist, if you prefer.

Linda

In that case I think. . .

. . .this poll will provide no useful information at all because it's chock full of misplaced assumptions and the opinions of a bunch of internet posters don't amount to a hill of beans in this crazy, mixed up world.

[bigred]

This is an inside joke I'm not up on, right? I mean you don't seriously think any of these minor changes in the circumstances make rape more or less likely? I've never come so close to voting for the planet X silliness.

[Complexity]

Originally Posted by ImaginalDisc

So the assumption is that the rapist is the man?

There is no need for such an assumption given the choices listed.

[fls]

Originally Posted by bigred

This is an inside joke I'm not up on, right? I mean you don't seriously think any of these minor changes in the circumstances make rape more or less likely?

Some people think that it does make a difference, so I wondered what others thought.

Quote:

I've never come so close to voting for the planet X silliness.

I don't know what it is, but for some reason, it's more satisfying to vote silly than just not vote.

Linda

[Pup]

Originally Posted by fls

There may or may not be conversation with the first option. You're just getting more information with the second and third option that you don't get with the first.

Linda

I'm taking back my agreement with Complexity. That would only be true if the question was about the number of rapes.

Man propositions woman means x% chance of rape.

Man doesn't proposition woman means y% chance of rape.

Man and woman on elevator is a weighted average of x and y. It will be higher than or equal to one and lower than or equal to the other, so it's actually the worst of the three choices, and can at best only tie for the greatest chance of rape.

I think.

This is worse than the Monty Hall problem.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by Pup

I'm taking back my agreement with Complexity. That would only be true if the question was about the number of rapes.

Man propositions woman means x% chance of rape.

Man doesn't proposition woman means y% chance of rape.

Man and woman on elevator is a weighted average of x and y. It will be higher than or equal to one and lower than or equal to the other, so it's actually the worst of the three choices, and can at best only tie for the greatest chance of rape.

I think.

This is worse than the Monty Hall problem.

Until recently my thought process would have been along these lines, though perhaps not quite so precise. But lately I am trying to make myself simplify my thought process and the best way for me to do that is sets. Viewing the question this way, the full set is "Man and Woman on Elevator." Subset is "Man Propositions Woman on Elevator." Second subset is "Man Does Not Proposition Woman on Elevator." Final, unstated subset, is "Man Rapes Woman." That final subset will include some of the first two subsets, but all three will be smaller than the full set.

[quarky]

Is this the new math?

I don't like elevators much; prefer the stairs.

But I don't like rape even more.

[fls]

Pup, to avoid introducing confusion between numbers and probability (or likelihood, etc.), all choices would be in reference to the same group - women who are riding in an elevator alone with a man.

Linda

[blobru]

It's the Sleeping Beauty Paradox again, quarky, except now Sleeping Beauty's merely sleepy, and Prince Charming ain't so charming (unless "creeper" means charming in Gaelic). Still, he rides to her rescue by sharing an elevator and offering her some "coffee". When she wakes up Monday, what are the odds that "coffee" meant coffee?

Sorry to derail, fls. I went with:

the third guy, only because he's the silent-type and you can't trust them silent-types; a bit glib, but I was thinking of the case where he might be planning to abduct her and doesn't want to draw attention to himself; honestly, wasn't quite sure how to reason about it... can i have a do-over?

[Cavemonster]

I voted for the second option.
The question is how does a proposition or the lack of a proposition effect a risk assessment at that moment.

All other things being unknown, any person is a possible rapist, in the same way they are a possible nobel laureate, stamp collector or mailman.

If I know nothing else about a person, and I learn that they can read, the probability of them being a nobel laureate increases. The mass of humans has been divided into two categories, the literate and the illiterate. One of those two groups is more likely to contain a nobel laureate than the other and our man is in that group. From the wider set, our chances have increased.

Let's return to the elevator. The most obvious information that a proposition imparts is that this man wants to have sex with this woman. Dividing the world into people who want to have sex with her and people who don't, which camp is more likely to contain the rapist? By definition, the rapist wants to have sex with her, (leaving aside whether rape is "about" sex) So this piece of information increases the likelyhood.

What else do we learn from the proposition? We learn that the man is willing to take some action to fullfill his desire for sex with her. Again, as compared to the camp who would take no action whatsoever, we've increased our chances.

Is there anything in a proposition that decreases the chances of a rape? I'm sure arguments can be made, but I honestly can't think of any with the strength and clarity of the two above that increase the chances, I'd be hay to hear them though.

Is there anything in the lack of a proposition that increases the chances? Again, not with the clarity of the increases above. People have mentioned a "silent type" but the fear of the rapist as mugger, coming out of the darkness to attack doesn't match the numbers. Of course, the greater number of rapes are by known people. and I can say anecdotally that the majority of rape reports I've read and heard that involved a waking, undrugged victim began with a "request".

Now the amount of the increases is still very small, and ultimately, unknown, but yes, I'd call it a net increase.

[Aepervius]

Cavemnonster you can use the same type of argument and lead to the contrary conclusion.

"man want to rape her not make love"
"man should not annoucne intention but take her by surprise otherwise an alarmed woman (alarmed by asking for sex) might start already grasping at mace or self defense when asked and thus is more difficult to surprise or overwhelm".
"conclusion : the 3rd option is more likely : the man which do not speak to the woman in the elevator"

PS: I don't think either of the reasonning is valid. Just saying that you are making argument out of wool cloth.

[JJM 777]

Elevator does not make a man a rapist, methinks.

First you need the rapist, then you need to have bad luck to end up alone with him while he feels safe to assault you. There are places that rapists seek, those would be the risky places, maybe a dimly lit park in the quiet hours of the night. Or the bedroom of an acquaintance who sometimes gives and sometimes not, today frustratingly not.

[Cavemonster]

Originally Posted by Aepervius

Cavemnonster you can use the same type of argument and lead to the contrary conclusion.

"man want to rape her not make love"
"man should not annoucne intention but take her by surprise otherwise an alarmed woman (alarmed by asking for sex) might start already grasping at mace or self defense when asked and thus is more difficult to surprise or overwhelm".
"conclusion : the 3rd option is more likely : the man which do not speak to the woman in the elevator"

PS: I don't think either of the reasonning is valid. Just saying that you are making argument out of wool cloth.

Yes, I very clearly state in my post that you CAN make the same kind of argument, but that to my mind they aren't as strong.

For instance, "man want to rape her not make love"
For one, to proposition is not to want to "make love" unless you're being really poetic about your phrasing. From the proposition alone, all we know is that he wants sex.
They aren't mutually exclusive categories. Date rape is incredibly common. Julian Assange is in trouble for supposedly raping someone he had had consensual intercourse with hours previously.

In my example, there is a clear set of categories category you can create from the new information. Those who want to have sex with her and those who don't, and we fully eliminate the category that was far less likely to contain a rapist.

Quote:

"man should not annoucne intention but take her by surprise otherwise an alarmed woman (alarmed by asking for sex) might start already grasping at mace or self defense when asked and thus is more difficult to surprise or overwhelm"

.

This is again counter to the majority of rape reports I've heard, which I actually mentioned in my post.
What are the two equivalent categories you imagine for "man want to rape her not make love"?

[Garrette]

I've been thinking a bit and may have to modify my answer, given in post #18, though I also may not. Still thinking.

Here is a recent real world example from my life which I think is analogous. I will leave out details.


I have a background in security--providing it, planning it, conducting assessments of it, etc.



Someone I know recently fired someone. The person fired had been a royal pain for over a year, but institutional policy eliminated a quick termination as a possibility, so it dragged on this long.

During the year+ of the saga, there were many occasions--coinciding with disciplinary/personnel actions--on which my friend felt concerned about the employee taking violent retaliatory action. On those occasions I offered my professional opinion that there was really very little (virtually nothing) about which to be concerned. However, because my friend was distressed, I offered to spend time (unobtrusively) at my friend's workplace during the times of concern; the offer was always declined.

A few weeks ago the actual firing took place. My friend's concern skyrocketed. I explained and offered again. The fired employee exercised the right to appeal. Concern about actions at the appeal were raised. I explained again.

On the day of the appeal I received a call from my friend: The employee came in, refused to take part in the appeal and instead took the offer of resigning in lieu of termination.

My friend was immensely relieved. My response: I drove over immediately and spent the remainder of the day there. My friend tried to talk me out of it, but I insisted. Since the employee had expressly given up on the system, the likelihood of violence had increased. It was still minimal, but it had increased. Just as importantly from the perspective of managing the violence, the window of greatest risk was a manageable two or three business days. So while I expected nothing to happen (it didn't), the increased risk along with precautions I could reasonably take on behalf of my friend, I acted.

So here's the analogy which doesn't perfectly mirror my example since I tailored it to mirror the OP:

Under which circumstance do you think violence is more likely?

1. An employee is fired

2. An employee is fired expresses frustration with the system

3. An employee is fired and does not express frustration with the system


Based on my own actions, I'd have to say I think it's #2, but that's not consistent with the answer I gave to the OP.

Still thinking.

[fls]

How about:

Under which condition has the most rape occurred?

Linda

[sphenisc]

Based on personal observation the first three options are exactly equally like to result in rape. There doesn't seem to be an option for that.

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by fls

How about:

Under which condition has the most rape occurred?

Linda

c.v. number of times each condition has occured?

[brodski]

Originally Posted by Complexity

There is no need for such an assumption given the choices listed.

Well, the idea hat a person is more or less' likely to be raped by someone who they proposition is a different question as to whether they are more or less likely to be raped by someone who propositions them.
Which question are we trying to address?

[fls]

Originally Posted by Lothian

c.v. number of times each condition has occured?

I think so (not sure what "c.v." means).

Linda

[Lothian]

Originally Posted by fls

I think so (not sure what "c.v." means).

Linda

Sorry. Shorthand for compare with. I meant c.f

[Garrette]

Not sure if this will help, but I thought I'd put completely arbitrary numbers to it:

1. Set (Men and Women on Elevator) = 100

2. Set (Men and Women on Elevator and Man Propositions Woman) = 80

3. Set (Men and Women on Elevator and Man Does Not Proposition Woman) = 20

4. Set (2, above, and Man Rapes Woman) = 5

5. Set (3, above, and Man Rapes Woman) = 2


It's obvious that Sets 2 through 5 are subsets of 1, so the greatest number of rapes happens in Set 1 as opposed to any subset.

However, as probabilities within a set or subset I think it changes.

P(Rape) in Set(1) = 7/100 = .07

P(Rape) in Set(2) = 5/80 = .0625

P(Rape) in Set(3) = 2/20 = .1


The numbers don't mean anything since I made them up EXCEPT to indicate that the probability of rape can indeed be higher in a subset than in the large set.

May have to revise my original answer.

[Garrette]

Originally Posted by fls

How about:

Under which condition has the most rape occurred?

Linda

Ah. Different question. Obviously number 1.

[icerat]

Given the size of the superset of all occurrences in a year of a man riding in an elevator with a woman, I suspect that to several decimal places the likelihood of each all round out to about zero.

(note: this doesn't mean they are zero!)

[Pup]

Originally Posted by Garrette

The numbers don't mean anything since I made them up EXCEPT to indicate that the probability of rape can indeed be higher in a subset than in the large set.

May have to revise my original answer.

See my spoiler-tagged post above. I came to the same conclusion, and in fact, I think that the probability will always be higher in one of the subgroups (unless all three happen to be exactly equal). So one can immediately reject the first option.

That's assuming we're talking probability and not actual numbers, of course. If it's actual numbers, it must be number 1, since it's a total of 2 and 3.

I haven't voted, because it seems to me the most significant factor is missing: what does the woman do afterwards. I'm assuming the vast majority of rapes will be by the male, thus that choice will dominate the probabilities.

I'd think that by far the highest chance of rape would be if he propositions her and she says yes, because then he can steer her to a suitable location--his car, an isolated area, his room, her room, etc. I just can't imagine actual rape occurring between floors on an elevator, due to the time constraints and risk (he has to leave the building, probably through a lobby, at some point). Groping, maybe, yeah, but that's not the question.

While that would mean the greatest chance would be if he propositioned her, I'd think the probability would drop back to less than the other option if she turned him down, since the chances are that he'd move on to another victim that he could manipulate more easily to a safe (for him) location.

This is based on a guess (don't actually know statistics) that most rapes are either by rapists trolling for random handy victims who might at most meet a vague profile--brown hair or something--or are date rapes where what seems like a yes turns into a no but the rapist won't accept that.

[Roadtoad]

Originally Posted by Pup

See my spoiler-tagged post above. I came to the same conclusion, and in fact, I think that the probability will always be higher in one of the subgroups (unless all three happen to be exactly equal). So one can immediately reject the first option.

That's assuming we're talking probability and not actual numbers, of course. If it's actual numbers, it must be number 1, since it's a total of 2 and 3.

I haven't voted, because it seems to me the most significant factor is missing: what does the woman do afterwards. I'm assuming the vast majority of rapes will be by the male, thus that choice will dominate the probabilities.

I'd think that by far the highest chance of rape would be if he propositions her and she says yes, because then he can steer her to a suitable location--his car, an isolated area, his room, her room, etc. I just can't imagine actual rape occurring between floors on an elevator, due to the time constraints and risk (he has to leave the building, probably through a lobby, at some point). Groping, maybe, yeah, but that's not the question.

While that would mean the greatest chance would be if he propositioned her, I'd think the probability would drop back to less than the other option if she turned him down, since the chances are that he'd move on to another victim that he could manipulate more easily to a safe (for him) location.

This is based on a guess (don't actually know statistics) that most rapes are either by rapists trolling for random handy victims who might at most meet a vague profile--brown hair or something--or are date rapes where what seems like a yes turns into a no but the rapist won't accept that.

Note the high lighted parts: IIRC, most rapes are committed by people who actually know the victim.

[Cuddles]

Planet X. I don't think there's any meaningful way to calculate the probabilities, and therefore no way to compare them.

[AvalonXQ]

As others have pointed out, 1 cannot be the most likely out of 1, 2, and 3, as all instances of 1 are either 2 or 3. If either propositioning or not changes the probability at all, 1 has to be in the middle.

[fls]

Please note I started this thread in Science, Mathematics, Medicine, and Technology.

Linda