'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualties to show up but no one calls'
February 26th, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families"It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center. Day after day, you wait for the casualties to show up from the alleged campus rape epidemic—but no one calls. Could this mean that the crisis is overblown? No: it means, according to the campus sexual-assault industry, that the abuse of coeds is worse than anyone had ever imagined. It means that consultants and counselors need more funding to persuade student rape victims to break the silence of their suffering...
"The campus rape industry’s central tenet is that one-quarter of all college girls will be raped or be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years (completed rapes outnumbering attempted rapes by a ratio of about three to two). The girls’ assailants are not terrifying strangers grabbing them in dark alleys but the guys sitting next to them in class or at the cafeteria."
Heather Mac Donald's recent column What campus rape crisis? Promiscuity and hype have created a phony epidemic at colleges (2/24/08) debunks the commonly propagated myth that one out of every four or five college women will be victims of rape or attempted rape. I don't agree with everything she says about modern college sex culture or the rape research, but her central premise--that a fake rape crisis has been whipped up against hapless, ever-vilified college boys--is correct.
Many of her arguments aren't new--Christina Hoff Sommers, Warren Farrell, Wendy McElroy, myself, and others all covered this issue from a similar angle years ago. But Mac Donald does update us on the issue, as well as bringing out some other interesting tidbits about modern campus life.
Predictably, the ladies at www.Feministing.com have responded with boiling rage and obscenities, without attempting to factually critique Mac Donald's research and arguments. The Feministing blog post is LA Times: What rape crisis?
I make the following offer--if anybody at www.feministing.com or any other feminist has written or would like to write a critique of Mac Donald's article, I will publish it here. If anyone would like to take me up on this, please contact me at glenn@glennsacks.com.
Below is a excerpt from and a link to the long version of Mac Donald's article as it originally appeared in City Journal (1/18/08)
The Campus Rape Myth
The reality: bogus statistics, feminist victimology, and university-approved sex toys
Heather Mac Donald
City Journal, 1/18/08
It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center. Day after day, you wait for the casualties to show up from the alleged campus rape epidemic—but no one calls. Could this mean that the crisis is overblown? No: it means, according to the campus sexual-assault industry, that the abuse of coeds is worse than anyone had ever imagined. It means that consultants and counselors need more funding to persuade student rape victims to break the silence of their suffering.
The campus rape movement highlights the current condition of radical feminism, from its self-indulgent bathos to its embrace of ever more vulnerable female victimhood. But the movement is an even more important barometer of academia itself. In a delicious historical irony, the baby boomers who dismantled the university’s intellectual architecture in favor of unbridled sex and protest have now bureaucratized both. While women’s studies professors bang pots and blow whistles at antirape rallies, in the dorm next door, freshman counselors and deans pass out tips for better orgasms and the use of sex toys. The academic bureaucracy is roomy enough to sponsor both the dour antimale feminism of the college rape movement and the promiscuous hookup culture of student life. The only thing that doesn’t fit into the university’s new commitments is serious scholarly purpose.
The campus rape industry’s central tenet is that one-quarter of all college girls will be raped or be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years (completed rapes outnumbering attempted rapes by a ratio of about three to two). The girls’ assailants are not terrifying strangers grabbing them in dark alleys but the guys sitting next to them in class or at the cafeteria.
This claim, first published in Ms. magazine in 1987, took the universities by storm. By the early 1990s, campus rape centers and 24-hour hotlines were opening across the country, aided by tens of millions of dollars of federal funding. Victimhood rituals sprang up: first the Take Back the Night rallies, in which alleged rape victims reveal their stories to gathered crowds of candle-holding supporters; then the Clothesline Project, in which T-shirts made by self-proclaimed rape survivors are strung on campus, while recorded sounds of gongs and drums mark minute-by-minute casualties of the “rape culture.” A special rhetoric emerged: victims’ family and friends were “co-survivors”; “survivors” existed in a larger “community of survivors.”
An army of salesmen took to the road, selling advice to administrators on how to structure sexual-assault procedures, and lecturing freshmen on the “undetected rapists” in their midst. Rape bureaucrats exchanged notes at such gatherings as the Inter Ivy Sexual Assault Conferences and the New England College Sexual Assault Network. Organizations like One in Four and Men Can Stop Rape tried to persuade college boys to redefine their masculinity away from the “rape culture.” The college rape infrastructure shows no signs of a slowdown. In 2006, for example, Yale created a new Sexual Harassment and Assault Resources and Education Center, despite numerous resources for rape victims already on campus.
If the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely. The nation’s nearly 10 million female undergrads would need to take the most stringent safety precautions. Certainly, they would have to alter their sexual behavior radically to avoid falling prey to the rape epidemic.
None of this crisis response occurs, of course—because the crisis doesn’t exist. During the 1980s, feminist researchers committed to the rape-culture theory had discovered that asking women directly if they had been raped yielded disappointing results—very few women said that they had been. So Ms. commissioned University of Arizona public health professor Mary Koss to develop a different way of measuring the prevalence of rape. Rather than asking female students about rape per se, Koss asked them if they had experienced actions that she then classified as rape. Koss’s method produced the 25 percent rate, which Ms. then published.
Koss’s study had serious flaws. Her survey instrument was highly ambiguous, as University of California at Berkeley social-welfare professor Neil Gilbert has pointed out. But the most powerful refutation of Koss’s research came from her own subjects: 73 percent of the women whom she characterized as rape victims said that they hadn’t been raped. Further—though it is inconceivable that a raped woman would voluntarily have sex again with the fiend who attacked her—42 percent of Koss’s supposed victims had intercourse again with their alleged assailants.
All subsequent feminist rape studies have resulted in this discrepancy between the researchers’ conclusions and the subjects’ own views. A survey of sorority girls at the University of Virginia found that only 23 percent of the subjects whom the survey characterized as rape victims felt that they had been raped—a result that the university’s director of Sexual and Domestic Violence Services calls “discouraging.” Equally damning was a 2000 campus rape study conducted under the aegis of the Department of Justice. Sixty-five percent of what the feminist researchers called “completed rape” victims and three-quarters of “attempted rape” victims said that they did not think that their experiences were “serious enough to report.” The “victims” in the study, moreover, “generally did not state that their victimization resulted in physical or emotional injuries,” report the researchers.
Just as a reality check, consider an actual student-related rape: in 2006, Labrente Robinson and Jacoby Robinson broke into the Philadelphia home of a Temple University student and a Temple graduate, and anally, vaginally, and orally penetrated the women, including with a gun. The chance that the victims would not consider this event “serious enough to report,” or physically and emotionally injurious, is exactly nil. In short, believing in the campus rape epidemic depends on ignoring women’s own interpretations of their experiences—supposedly the most grievous sin in the feminist political code.
None of the obvious weaknesses in the research has had the slightest drag on the campus rape movement, because the movement is political, not empirical. In a rape culture, which “condones physical and emotional terrorism against women as a norm,” sexual assault will wind up underreported, argued the director of Yale’s Sexual Harassment and Assault Resources and Education Center in a March 2007 newsletter. You don’t need evidence for the rape culture; you simply know that it exists. But if you do need evidence, the underreporting of rape is the best proof there is.
Campus rape researchers may feel that they know better than female students themselves about the students’ sexual experiences, but the students are voting with their feet and staying away in droves from the massive rape apparatus built up since the Ms. article. Referring to rape hotlines, rape consultant Brett Sokolow laments: “The problem is, on so many of our campuses, very few people ever call. And mostly, we’ve resigned ourselves to the under-utilization of these resources.”
Federal law requires colleges to publish reported crimes affecting their students. The numbers of reported sexual assaults—the law does not require their confirmation—usually run under half a dozen a year on private campuses and maybe two to three times that at large public universities. You might think that having so few reports of sexual assault a year would be a point of pride; in fact, it’s a source of gall for students and administrators alike. Yale’s associate general counsel and vice president were clearly on the defensive when asked by the Yale alumni magazine in 2004 about Harvard’s higher numbers of reported assaults; the reporter might as well have been needling them about a Harvard-Yale football rout. “Harvard must have double-counted or included incidents not required by federal law,” groused the officials. The University of Virginia does not publish the number of its sexual-assault hearings because it is so low. “We’re reticent to publicize it when we have such a small ‘n’ number,” says Nicole Eramu, Virginia’s associate dean of students.
Campuses do everything they can to get their numbers of reported and adjudicated sexual assaults up—adding new categories of lesser offenses, lowering the burden of proof, and devising hearing procedures that will elicit more assault charges. At Yale, it is the accuser who decides whether the accused may confront her—a sacrifice of one of the great Anglo-Saxon truth-finding procedures. “You don’t want them to not come to the board and report, do you?” asks physics professor Peter Parker, convener of the university’s Sexual Harassment Grievance Board.
The scarcity of reported sexual assaults means that the women who do report them must be treated like rare treasures. New York University’s Wellness Exchange counsels people to “believe unconditionally” in sexual-assault charges because “only 2 percent of reported rapes are false reports” (a ubiquitous claim that dates from radical feminist Susan Brownmiller’s 1975 tract Against Our Will). As Stuart Taylor and K. C. Johnson point out in their book Until Proven Innocent, however, the rate of false reports is at least 9 percent and probably closer to 50 percent. Just how powerful is the “believe unconditionally” credo? David Lisak, a University of Massachusetts psychology professor who lectures constantly on the antirape college circuit, acknowledged to a hall of Rutgers students this November that the “Duke case,” in which a black stripper falsely accused three white Duke lacrosse players of rape in 2006, “has raised the issue of false allegations.” But Lisak didn’t want to talk about the Duke case, he said. “I don’t know what happened at Duke. No one knows.” Actually, we do know what happened at Duke: the prosecutor ignored clearly exculpatory evidence and alibis that cleared the defendants, and was later disbarred for his misconduct. But to the campus rape industry, a lying plaintiff remains a victim of the patriarchy, and the accused remain forever under suspicion.
Read the full article here.
"));
19 queries. 0.819 seconds.
February 26th, 2008 at 12:40 pm
No Crisis = No Funding
No Crisis= No Credibility for the agenda driven feminists.
The Above = We have to have a Crisis!
February 26th, 2008 at 12:44 pm
It is unfortunate that radical feminists likely will not celebrate Heather MacDonald’s conclusion, which is grounded on sound research and objectively verifiable facts, that there is no campus rape crisis. After all, they reacted with extreme dismay that Crystal Gail Mangum was not really raped. Sadly, with no authority beyond hysterical ipse dixits, it is likely that radical feminists will resort to personal attacks on Ms. MacDonald and screech and moan that “there MUST be a crisis! There HAS to be!”
As Ms. MacDonald points out, the radical feminist mantra that a sizable percentage of college men are rapists is premised on a discredited study finding that a fifth to a quarter of all college women will be raped or will be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years. Not only is this conclusion absurd on its face and sufficient to cause college women to shun anything male, but it was based on a study where the vast majority of the women who were supposedly raped admitted that even they didn’t think they’d been raped.
One wonders how the purported assailants could have known they were committing rape if their “victims” didn’t even realize it.
Oh, I get it: campus rape must be one of those "secret" crimes where the victim and the criminal don't even know a crime is occurring. That's the only plausible explanation.
As Ms. MacDonald points out, if there were a “rape crisis” along the magnitude proffered by radical feminists, our college campuses would resemble proverbial Dodge City in terms of lawlessness and there would be cries to banish males from campus. Does this reflect reality? The question scarcely survives its statement.
By accepting the radical feminist rape hyperbole, we are allowing almost half of our college population – males – to be labeled as rapists or rapists-in-waiting. What other class of persons in our society would we so freely disparage without compunction?
February 26th, 2008 at 12:47 pm
The attitude of the campus rape centre reminds me of the joke, which I found mildly amusing when I was about 9.
Q. "Why do elephants paint their toenails pink?"
A. "So that they can hide in cherry trees."
Q. "Have you ever seen an elephant in a cherry tree?"
A "No."
"Well that shows how well it works."
February 26th, 2008 at 12:54 pm
Tim Says:
"As Ms. MacDonald points out, the radical feminist mantra that a sizable percentage of college men are rapists is premised on a discredited study finding that a fifth to a quarter of all college women will be raped or will be the targets of attempted rape by the end of their college years."
It is very interesting to me that you bring this up as it really draws attention to something I've been feeling for a while now, but haven't had the chance to atriculate.
Let us assume for one moment that indeed 20% of college women will be raped. Even if that is true, it doesn't actually lead to the conclusion that 20% of college men are rapists.
That is indeed the conclusion we are meant to draw from such a statement as somewhere deep down we want to see a 1 to 1 correspondence between the rapist and the victim... however a far more realisic view would be to conclude that someone who is inclined to rape will not just rape one person.
In other words, even if we assume that 20% of women are raped in college (something that is ludicrious on it's face to begin with)... that doesn't invariably lead us to conclude that a similar percentage of men are criminals.
No matter how you slice it the vast majority of men are not rapists (i.e. greater than 96%)... something that many who quote that 20% statistic don't seem inclined to admit. They would rather incite the unsubstantiated believe that one out of four men you meet are ready to throw you down and take when they want.
February 26th, 2008 at 12:59 pm
Campuses do everything they can to get their numbers of reported and adjudicated sexual assaults up—adding new categories of lesser offenses, lowering the burden of proof, and devising hearing procedures that will elicit more assault charges.
-------------------------------------
Quite simple.
Sounds like they trump up charges, to keep getting the funding.
~ Keep the numbers up, more $$$ in the pot.
~ More $$$ in the pot, the more they can trump up more new categories .
And the wheel keeps turning.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:21 pm
I read some of the comments on feministing.com
Wow, many of those people just don't seem to care about logic or science at all. I think I also remember some men on there spewing similar vitriol. Geez.
Masculist XY
February 26th, 2008 at 1:33 pm
Much of this is based on the 1/4 number that came from a blurring the definition of rape, to things that were not forced. I've always been curious what % of college men were "raped/ attempted raped" if the men were asked the same exact questions. I think it would work out to be about the same %. Which they could never report since no one would believe that 1/4 of men on campus were raped by women and it would show how blurred the definition of rape has become.
The author points out that most of the women in the survey that were being counted as rape victims do not consider themselves to have been raped.
Many feminists will point to this and say it means they have been brainwashed (by the mythical Patriacrchy) into believing that you can do anything to them.
But what it really means is that the giver of the survey has a definition of rape that is so watered down and different from the accepted definition that most women find it laughably wrong as a definition of rape.
Lets apply this watered down definition, to another field. I didn't really want to go to work today, But I did, and worked 8 hrs, because I didn't want to get fired. was I forced, no. But going by the waterd down definition I am the same as a slave. I did "work I didn't really want to do" = slavery. Anyone can see that this is an insult to real slavery except those few hardliners who want to distort statistics and create a crisis.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:34 pm
"The Justice Department has found that, in fact, only 1.7 percent of college women were rape victims, in addition to 1.1 percent who were victims of attempted rape."
Google your own version of these statistics.
You will never come up with a 1 - in - 4 (25%) result.
There is no rape epidemic --- on campus, or in the nation as a whole.
It is feminist propaganda necessary to keep VAWA money flowing....
February 26th, 2008 at 1:43 pm
None of this surprises me. The entire feminist revolution is based on exaggerated accounts and false accusations.
The entire theory of male patriarchal oppression can be decompiled and proven utterly false with objective empirical review. But then how will women justify the over inflated self-worth and sense of entitlement?
February 26th, 2008 at 1:44 pm
Men are the new Jews.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:45 pm
The article said: "You don’t need evidence for the rape culture; you simply know that it exists."
This is a very interesting viewpoint. It places rape in the category of demons, devils, and boogeymen.
It means that much of the government policy is faith-based, the faith that rape is at least 10 x more prevalent than it is.
If you trust the people who stand to gain from 'addressing' a problem with reporting and studying the problem, expect corruption and inaccuracy.
It is an age old problem akin to warlordism. The warlords could declare some group as the 'enemy' and then go kill them and take anything they wanted.
At least if there was an enemy warlord coming after you, you simply had to collect your better minds, better armor, better weapons and better communication and devastate them, killing them completely so they did not ever come back.
Our government protects these current day warlords tooth and nail.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:58 pm
All men are rapists and that's all they are" -- Marilyn French, Author, "The Women's Room"
"I claim that rape exists any time sexual intercourse occurs when it has not been initiated by the woman, out of her own genuine affection and desire." Robin Morgan
"Heterosexual intercourse is the pure, formalized expression of contempt for women's bodies." -- Andrea Dworkin
"And if the professional rapist is to be separated from the average dominant heterosexual [male], it may be mainly a quantitative difference." -- Susan Griffin "Rape: The All- American Crime"
"[Rape] is nothing more or less than a conscious process of intimidation by which all men keep all women in a state of fear" -- Susan Brownmiller (Against Our Will p. 6)
Looks as if Koss had help from French, Morgan, Dworkin, Friffin and Brownmiller in developing “a different way of measuring the prevalence of rape.”
With such irrational feminist “leaders’ it is not hard to fathom why the followers are so “other worldly”.
Stephen Weiss said:
“It means that much of the government policy is faith-based, the faith that rape is at least 10 x more prevalent than it is.”
You are right it is a belief system, pseudo-intellectual at best and religious at worst - replete with iconoclasm and new-speak dogma.
February 26th, 2008 at 1:59 pm
This is a great article. I especially love the way it pretty much outright laughs in the face of the "rape crisis" people, with no remorse. No equivocating. No apologies. And NO Sure it happens and it's a terrible thing, but..."
Thank God.
THIS is the proper way to combat feminist principles and thought processes in my opinion.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Q) "You are a male in collage, have you ever raped a female student?"
A) "NO!"
"Denial is the evidence that you have raped a female student."
b
February 26th, 2008 at 2:00 pm
Stephen, I don't think many people, in or out of the government really believe there is a rape epidemic or rape culture. There is an angry, noisy segment of society that government appeases by throwing money to them. Yes, rapes occur; I'm fine with having services to help purported victims because it is a horribly deilicate subject. Boys who claim false accusation also should be helped. As the article points out, the ones NOT buying the so-called rape culture are -- the students. Just like the people on the street don't buy radical feminism. Forty years of feminism, and people still aren't buying the nutty aspects of it. That tells me they never will. I applaud the students referenced in the article -- and the author was referring to both male and female students.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:05 pm
"The campus rape movement highlights the current condition of radical feminism, from its self-indulgent bathos to its embrace of ever more vulnerable female victimhood. But the movement is an even more important barometer of academia itself. In a delicious historical irony, the baby boomers who dismantled the university’s intellectual architecture in favor of unbridled sex and protest have now bureaucratized both. While women’s studies professors bang pots and blow whistles at antirape rallies, in the dorm next door, freshman counselors and deans pass out tips for better orgasms and the use of sex toys. The academic bureaucracy is roomy enough to sponsor both the dour antimale feminism of the college rape movement and the promiscuous hookup culture of student life. The only thing that doesn’t fit into the university’s new commitments is serious scholarly purpose."
This girl hits it right on the nose.
It is in fact the "misplaced protectors" of the baby boomer generation of males that feel some sense of perversion to be the loud mouth anti-male protector of young college girls.
These baby boomer males must find some sort of delightfull perversion to lecture in front of 20 young females and pretend to be their "real protector" against college age male friends.
"Perverted misplaced protector, baby boomer males"
February 26th, 2008 at 2:15 pm
Tim Murray said:
“Forty years of feminism, and people still aren't buying the nutty aspects of it. That tells me they never will.”
Agreed, however, I am not as comfortable as you on this, cf current legislative trends (this is to a measurable extent people-independent – it will take substantial effort to “fix” this.
“I applaud the students referenced in the article -- and the author was referring to both male and female students.”
Good point - I second that.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:40 pm
“Forty years of feminism, and people still aren't buying the nutty aspects of it. That tells me they never will.”
Oh they've bought it alright. They've built an entire culture based on the concept that men oppress women.
But now after 40 years some are starting to see the flaws in the philosophy. Some are willing to say, "This is bull".
And while that is a positive change I doubt very much it will ever change my opinion of women. I feel for them exactly what the Marylin French's and Andrea Dworkin's feel about men.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:52 pm
I think the author's comments about the students is reflective of what President Nixon called "The Silent Majority." You don't think Ronald Reagan scored the most lopsided presidential victory in history with any feminist support do you? They HATED Reagan. Or Bush in 2004? They HATE Bush. The radical feminists are noisy and they are dangerous because they are so active, but they do NOT represent the mainstream, I am convinced.
February 26th, 2008 at 2:59 pm
I don't believe most people have bought it... but additionally it is difficult to call them on it sometimes as when you do there is the looming threat of someone calling you a rapist or a rape apoligist just because you don't accept their statistics as gosple.
Take this quote from someone over at feministing:
"All I can envision is a bunch of rapists sitting in their secret rape-cave high fiving each other because the million dollar cheque they sent her worked and she actually wrote this article for them."
This is what some people actually think (albiet a small fraction of the population)... this is where some peoples minds actually go when they think about rape.
To them it isn't some isolated criminal who is doing horrid things... it is an organization devoted to sexually violating women, to them it is a club with a criminal adgenda.
Most people certainly don't buy into this world view... but similarly many don't want to be tossed in with this supposed "club" for asserting that the numbers seem rather fishy and unsupported.
This article was written by a woman... and instead of addressing this persons points the gut instinct was to imply that she must have been bribed by the "rape lobby".
February 26th, 2008 at 3:04 pm
These folks are clearly suffering from RDD!
Rape Deficit Disorder.
Surely there is some sort of licensed professional who can sell them some more advisory services to help to find -- or even encourage -- more rapes -- or at least more allegations of rapes?
Here's an idea: what if they get some funding for TUITION WAIVERS for rape victims? That makes sense, right? I mean who is going to object to helping the apparently rare victim of rape by having her tuition paid for her after such a trauma? I couldn't imagine myself objecting to such a compensation.
Then they could unmask the "true" level of rape going on!
You see folks, it's just a matter of putting a few incentives in place if you really want to attract some victims.
Pretty simple really.
Meanwhile, the forensic evidence on anonymous rape is that it is a highly specialized and very sick type of individual who does this, but also, that the vast majority of such rapes are committed by a tiny criminal sub-population of these specialized predators. DNA comparisons from criminal victims in major metro areas have shown this to be the case.
As for the type of rape where the victim knows the alleged perpetrator, this is also terrible, but the potential for such accusations being falsely made should concern all males having any contact with females.
Which suggests that the scales continue to tilt further and further in favor of smart men simply avoiding any unwitnessed contact with women.
Why take the risk?
Heck. Could it be that the reason why these staffers at the "college rape crisis center" are so loney is that not only are very few rapes occurring, but more and more young males are completely avoiding contact with women?
Now that would be proof that American society is protecting women, wouldn't it? -- if men are completely afraid to be anywhere near them?
What a great country.
February 26th, 2008 at 3:08 pm
feministcritics did an interesting point on this. One of the posters pointed out that instead of making nightime safer for women (considering it's already safer for women than men), all that 'take back the night' rallies do is encourage women to live in fear of a unsubstantiated bogeyman.
And yeah, this woman's obviously part of the patriarchy, or she's having her arm twisted by those rapists that 'benefit all men and disadvantage all women'
February 26th, 2008 at 4:01 pm
The radical feminists are noisy and they are dangerous because they are so active, but they do NOT represent the mainstream, I am convinced.
Indeed. The problem isn't so much voting power of radical feminism as much as the passive acceptance of feminist dogma by most of society--men and women. And when a group finds a cause that is closely linked to an aspect the radicals support they find a convenient bedfellow. It gives the illusion of solidarity which at times really does exist.
As an example take Hillary Clinton's victory in New Hampshire. Her emotional break down let women to come out and support her when by all accounts the previously would not have.
The power of the female electorate is real. The ability of Gender Feminists to manipulate that electorate is documented.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:07 pm
I agree with Jason.
Just ask ten people on the street if they believe one out of four college women are RAPED, and at least nine will look at you as if you are nuts. That's because if you believe that statistic, you really are nuts. Certifiable.
Academia, and its twisted sister, the radical feminist wing that rots in a narrow corridor of the blogosphere, are the hotbeds for this nutty thinking. If we can get our message out, the vast majority of people will side with us on this issue because the alternative just doesn't ring true.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
Wow, what a coincidence. Just as a posting on this subject comes on, I happen upon THIS at my college student center!
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u254/UmbrellaW/P1010027.jpg
http://i170.photobucket.com/albums/u254/UmbrellaW/P1010028.jpg
It might be like saying a gunshot wound is better than a stab wound, but how about the second one on the list, eh?
February 26th, 2008 at 4:38 pm
The country saw how the government handles rape accusations on college campuses.
Duke University's three Lacrosse students also have experience how fair hospital’s rape centers nurses, police, prosecutor, crime lab employees, court personnel, and their own school teachers treat men accused of rape.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:39 pm
*better was supposed to be "worse"
And the second pic's rotation didn't work, apparently.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:42 pm
There ought to be a college false witness crisis center. Tax payer money would be better spent.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Alex, that is truly sick. And sad.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:46 pm
Alex,
I just looked at the photo's you listed... I am really interested in knowing what exactly they consider to be "attempted rape".
The reason I ask is that I am fairly confident that most men could probably think back and come up with a time a rape was attempted on them as well, based upon whatever definition they might offer.
I almost feel like their definition will go something like this "a time when you didn't want to have sex... and your partner accepted it but didn't seem happy about it".
February 26th, 2008 at 4:50 pm
America is one of the only countries that does not press charges on false rape accussers.
February 26th, 2008 at 4:56 pm
Jason, you hit the nail on the head. They refuse to talk about the LEGAL definition of rape. Try that with them sometime -- it infuriates them. To the extent rape is forbidden, it is because it is a crime; therefore, the meaning of the word "rape" is only important in its legal context. Rape is very, very uncommon in the real world -- because as a matter of law consent is shown by conduct implied from the surrounding circumstances. No words need be spoken. The absence of consent is never shown by a woman's secret, subjective desire not to have sex. And frankly, you would have to be a moron not to know that women have sex for all sorts of reasons other than the fact that they really want to have sex -- e.g., to keep the guy happy, to get the guy to cooperate on some point, to get the guy to marry them, to have the guy's kid, etc. And yes, in their twisted fantasy world, THAT is rape because it was sex when they didn't want to have sex. In the real world, that's called normal.
February 26th, 2008 at 5:47 pm
One in four raped? It sounds like a case of wishful thinking. Not to downplay the horror of rape, but I've noticed it's usually the women who are fat, ugly slobs (Dworkin and her ilk) that scream the loudest about rape. Could it be they are just frustrated that no one has shown any interest in their bloated hides? Are they angry that no one finds their rolls of fat and cellulite alluring?
Just a thought.
Sadly, they have influenced the majority of women into their line of thinking so that a man is not safe in the company of any woman at any time. If she takes a disliking to you for any reason, she can haul out the rape accusation, and good luck proving your innocence.
But, hey. Not to worry. Women are honest, and would never lie about rape.
February 26th, 2008 at 6:19 pm
feministcritics did an interesting point on this. One of the posters pointed out that instead of making nightime safer for women (considering it's already safer for women than men), all that 'take back the night' rallies do is encourage women to live in fear of a unsubstantiated bogeyman.
As women hear that they are victims, they will think of themselves as victims. As they think of themselves as victims, they will act like victims. As they act like victims, they will place themselves into situations where they do actually become victims... perceiving that they have no ability to choose otherwise.
And thus, perception creates reality.
You think feminists would be rejoicing that the numbers of women on college campuses who are victims of rape is not as big as they thought it was. The fact that they are unhappy with the information demonstrates that feminists are not about helping women help themselves, but instead about creating the perception of a victim society of women for political purposes.
It appears that feminists are misogynists... they believe that women are incapable of taking care of themselves as men are and therefore want that demonstrated so that the government can take care of women.
February 26th, 2008 at 6:24 pm
"They refuse to talk about the LEGAL definition of rape."
Exactly. These days if a man even expresses a covert interest in a woman ten feet across the room it is classified as sexual assault, and by the nutcases of which we speak, rape. My son recently informed me of a student at his university who was suspended on similar charges. I'm simply in total and utter shock. If all a man does is to tell you that you're hot and that he fancies you ... if that's aasault/rape then I guess I and millions of other women have been raped and or assaulted countless of times. Its too ridiculous to even contemplate.
"By now, universities have traveled so far from their original task of immersing students in the greatest intellectual and artistic creations of humanity that criticizing any particular detour seems arbitrary. Still, the question presents itself: Why, exactly, are the schools offering workshops on orgasms and sex toys instead of on Michelangelo’s Campidoglio or Pushkin’s Eugene Onegin? Are students already so saturated with knowledge of Renaissance humanism or the evolution of constitutional democracy, say, that colleges can happily reroute resources to matters readily available on porn websites?"
An excellent point by the author. Colleges and universities these days seem to be preoccupied with everything else but academia and higher learning. Earlier the author made the point of student advocates who demand that university officials stay out of their private affairs because they're adults ... it begs to ask the question, why then can't these "adults" find information about how to improve their sex lives on their own time and with their own resources? Millions of tax payer dollars are being used on campuses throughout the country to fund programmes on how JoAnn can bring herself to orgasm. How does that benefit the greater good? Better yet, how is that any of my business? Doesn't giving yourself an orgasm constitutes "private affairs"?
Thirdly, one has to admire the aspiration of a society completely free of crime, where women can walk naked and ALL men everywhere have mastered the art of controlling their lust. We're unlikely to find that promise land, however. As long as mankind exists, crime is inevitable. But God forbid that anyone should suggest that these women take responsibility for their own safety. And why? Because the entire feminist movement is about reassigning perceived power and control from men to women. It was NEVER about equality. Their ideology supports the belief that men control the sex act because of their stronger impulse for sex. They view male sexuality as base and dirty, something to be repelled. They advocate (as usual) for promiscuity, as they do equality, without responsibility. They want their followers to run around buck naked, shaking theirs behinds provocatively in order to have men at their (sexual) mercy. They want to tell the entire female population to walk naked if you want, flash your breasts and expose your privates ... watch the men drool. The fact that you withold what he so obviously wants because you don't want to (legitimate) or just to be a tease and he can't do one damn thing about it is a drugging, empowering experience. Power. Control.
I don't deny that rape is a heinous crime that should not happen under any circumstances and my attempt is not trample upon the experience of rape victims. All I'm saying is that crime can be reduced, but it will never completely go away. Therefore all citizens must take the necessary precautions to protect themselves.
February 26th, 2008 at 6:59 pm
Okay, so its been the whole day now and I don't see any comments from the feminists. I know they read this site. Just goes to show that their vitriol is more bark than bite, and they can never come up with an answer with any substance to it.
February 26th, 2008 at 7:55 pm
Wait a minute! Are feminists for rape, or agin' it?
February 26th, 2008 at 8:16 pm
Alex,
Er, if there was a display in your student center that said: 99% of murder is perpetrated by blacks, 1% of guilty blacks are prosecuted........would that be allowed? The answer is no. While we have some free speach left in America, it does not include making knowingly false claims in order to harm another group's reputation and social standing.
Can you please request your Student Center administration to remove the display based on the above? You may want to reference the topic article, and other sites that are posted around here as proof.
Does someone have the time to post sites to help Alex's case?
February 26th, 2008 at 9:23 pm
Jay R., remember the radical feminist reaction when it turned out that Crystal Gail Mangum had NOT been raped by three Duke lacrosse players? The most eye-opening thing of the entire case was the anger, the cold silence for women who claim to be opposed to rape. Why? I got the distinct impression they would have preferred that she had been raped and three young men sent to prison for 30 years than what actually occurred. Some of them STILL say, "something happened in that house" even though there is no evidence to suppoirt it. One of the kids wasn't even there. I got the impression, evidence be damned, send three boys to prison forever as payback for the supposed sins of their "patriarchy" abstract.
Sick, sick, sick.
February 26th, 2008 at 10:00 pm
callum
"all that 'take back the night' rallies do is encourage women to live in fear of a unsubstantiated bogeyman."
MCA. Fear, hysteria,envy, jelousy, and drama...some women are so callous, it's the only thing they can feel.
February 26th, 2008 at 10:25 pm
The thing that has always amused me is that liberals tend to believe that most crime is a result of the oppression and inequality inherent in society, and that most criminals have simply been forced into crime because society has not given them a fair chance. Yet when the argument turns to crimes commited against women by men, the argument is suddenly turned upside down. Instead, the perpetrator is portrayed as an agent of the ruling class who is performing his job of keeping the oppressor class down.
February 26th, 2008 at 10:37 pm
[...] article based on its merits and the would post those on his blog. You read about the challenge here. Well here is my critique of the article and the reaction at feministing.com. You can read the [...]
February 26th, 2008 at 10:41 pm
"Exactly. These days if a man even expresses a covert interest in a woman ten feet across the room it is classified as sexual assault, and by the nutcases of which we speak, rape. My son recently informed me of a student at his university who was suspended on similar charges. I'm simply in total and utter shock. If all a man does is to tell you that you're hot and that he fancies you ... if that's aasault/rape then I guess I and millions of other women have been raped and or assaulted countless of times. Its too ridiculous to even contemplate."
I think this overstates it a bit. The general rule is that whenever a man expresses any interest in a woman whatsoever it is defined as sexual harassment. Sexual intercourse is increasingly defined as rape if the woman says it was rape, or if the woman has regrets, or if the man just didn't do a good job.
One of the problems is that men are still expected to do most of the work of initiating sex, but it is also increasingly defined as harassment or abuse if they do. Men who try to hit on women tend to be labelled as feckless sexual predators, while men who don't tend to be seen as wimpy or inadequate. So men have a choice between on the one hand being seen as a cad and risking having one's life ruined through false rape claims, or being a neutered male on the other.
February 26th, 2008 at 11:02 pm
I have a question/ Everyone agrees that this 25% statistic revolves around the interpritation of each question in that survey is a description rape, have anyone ever listed all the questions from that survey?
February 26th, 2008 at 11:08 pm
I tried loking for it, all I ever get is the tables of interperated answers at the end but never the questions
February 26th, 2008 at 11:10 pm
Davina,
with all the red meat you have thrown us, I will have most of my meals taken care of for a while. Thanks :-).
February 26th, 2008 at 11:16 pm
(Davina) -- "These days if a man even expresses a covert interest in a woman ten feet across the room it is classified as sexual assault..."
Davina, if I insulted you two times on this web site I could be prosecuted for "stalking" under current VAWA laws.
My defense would be that you are a very intelligent woman and that you entrapped me.
February 26th, 2008 at 11:17 pm
I have a question/ Everyone agrees that this 25% statistic revolves around the interpritation of each question in that survey is a description rape, have anyone ever listed all the questions from that survey?
I was reading thru feministing and came across one of those questions:
"Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?"
Most people, err.. most rational people would recognize this as "ya, he offered me drinks, I accepted, and regretted it after I woke up the next morning. It made a mistake, but I wasn't raped."
Yet, to the wonderful "I'm not responsible for my own actions!" girls at feministing, this is rape. God forbid a woman would have the power to say "no" to an offer of alcohol or drugs from a man! Apparently, because she has absolutely zero power to say no, he must of raped her... rather than her just making a bad decision and regretting it.
February 26th, 2008 at 11:28 pm
Davina --
So I understand from your posts, you are a mother of a son. I am the father of two daughters.
What do we have in common, given these ridiculous gender wars?
February 27th, 2008 at 12:13 am
Tim Murray said: "remember the radical feminist reaction when it turned out that Crystal Gail Mangum had NOT been raped by three Duke lacrosse players? The most eye-opening thing of the entire case was the anger, the cold silence for women who claim to be opposed to rape. Why? I got the distinct impression they would have preferred that she had been raped and three young men sent to prison for 30 years than what actually occurred. Some of them STILL say, "something happened in that house" even though there is no evidence to suppoirt it. One of the kids wasn't even there. I got the impression, evidence be damned, send three boys to prison forever as payback for the supposed sins of their "patriarchy" abstract."
I know. That's definitely one of the scariest things of the matter. As was said in Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson's excellent book about the affair, you couldn't have made up a story more in line with the race-class-gender theory of pseudo-oppression that the faculty was so obsessed with, than what was wrongfully believed to have happened with the lacrosse players. All those blowhards were so determined to turn what should have been a straightforward affair (no rape happened because the "evidence" for it is phonier than Cheez-Wiz) into some demented allegory of rich white male privilige and oppression against the poor black woman. They wreaked havoc on the lives of 3 innocent young men (and their teammates, and all their families) just because they were so intent on proving their extremist views right. Ideology as a concept is, in my philosophy, already a load of bunk and shouldn't be taken too seriously. But to promote it in spite of human suffering is the lowest you can possibly get.
You want to know what the most pathetic part is? I think there's a reason why so few of those extremists have apologized or admitted their wrong, and why some still claim that "something happened." It's not necessarily because they genuinly still believe in the guilt of the lacrosse players. It's something much more simple, yet given the circumstances, more pathetic. One word: pride. They staked so much into rallying behind the bandwagon of accusing the players of rape, that when the truth came out, they were made to look like a bunch of asses (ex: why do you think Nancy Grace just happened to have a substitute the day when the AG exonerated the defendents?). Instead of having the maturity, honor, and courage to admit they were wrong and reconsider their extremist views, they're pouting off in the corners, clinging desperately to the views that they've put WAY too much stock into while trying to wipe the egg of their face.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:14 am
Tim Murray said: "remember the radical feminist reaction when it turned out that Crystal Gail Mangum had NOT been raped by three Duke lacrosse players? The most eye-opening thing of the entire case was the anger, the cold silence for women who claim to be opposed to rape. Why? I got the distinct impression they would have preferred that she had been raped and three young men sent to prison for 30 years than what actually occurred. Some of them STILL say, "something happened in that house" even though there is no evidence to suppoirt it. One of the kids wasn't even there. I got the impression, evidence be damned, send three boys to prison forever as payback for the supposed sins of their "patriarchy" abstract."
I know. That's definitely one of the scariest things of the matter. As was said in Stuart Taylor and KC Johnson's excellent book about the affair, you couldn't have made up a story more in line with the race-class-gender theory of pseudo-oppression that the faculty was so obsessed with, than what was wrongfully believed to have happened with the lacrosse players. All those blowhards were so determined to turn what should have been a straightforward affair (no rape happened because the "evidence" for it is phonier than Cheez-Wiz) into some demented allegory of rich white male privilige and oppression against the poor black woman. They wreaked havoc on the lives of 3 innocent young men (and their teammates, and all their families) just because they were so intent on proving their extremist views right. Ideology as a concept is, in my philosophy, already a load of bunk and shouldn't be taken too seriously. But to promote it in spite of human suffering is the lowest you can possibly get.
You want to know what the most pathetic part is? I think there's a reason why so few of those extremists have apologized or admitted their wrong, and why some still claim that "something happened." It's not necessarily because they genuinly still believe in the guilt of the lacrosse players. It's something much more simple, yet given the circumstances, more pathetic. One word: pride. They staked so much into rallying behind the bandwagon of accusing the players of rape, that when the truth came out, they were made to look like a bunch of asses (ex: why do you think Nancy Grace just happened to have a substitute the day when the AG exonerated the defendents?). Instead of having the maturity, honor, and courage to admit they were wrong and reconsider their extremist views, they're pouting off in the corners, clinging desperately to the views that they've put WAY too much stock into while trying to wipe the egg off their faces.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:28 am
Ever hear the term beer goggles?
Apperently men have been getting raped since the moment mankin learned how to frement alcohol
February 27th, 2008 at 12:40 am
Living in a college town I read the local university rag pretty often to see what's up on campus. I am happy to report: the guys seem to be getting restless. Even with the strangle hold women have on the editorial content of the paper (I think the only male reporter is the sports reporter), I often see letters to the editor that state, quite succinctly, that men are tired of being painted with the rapist brush. There are tired of the urinal cakes, the pamphlets, the posters, and so on.
Incidentally, the on-campus Women's Studies coalition actually redeemed itself a tinsy bit: they are devoutly anti-male-circumcision (and say so and even give out pamphlets) on the grounds that it is genital mutilation (yes, they actually use that phrase). Now if they actually start discussion male reproductive rights and the like, I would be impressed.
Celia, scary quotes! I bet these same women would rail against equally false statements like "all women should be barefoot and pregnant". It is interesting that when sexism goes one way it is wrong, but the other it is fully acceptable.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:47 am
Excellent, Alex.
The only thing the feminists openly profess about the Mangum affair is that they are angry because the incident will keep other women from "coming forward."
How many times do we hear that,? In every case where there's a wrongful accusation of rape, some moron is quoted as saying, "This sort of thing will discourage real victims from coming forward." Hey, Einsteins, it hasn't discouraged the liars from coming forward, has it? They're still lying, trying to have some guy put away for 30 years because they're mad at the guy, or to cover up an affair, or whatever. If it hasn't stopped the liars from "coming forward" with their prevarications, why do you think it will stop REAL victims from "coming forward"?
No, they're not worried about "the real victims" anymore than O.J. is going to find "the real killer." You are correct, Alex. Pride. Self-righteous pride. The politically correct left is filled with it, and it's an ugly, ugly trait.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:00 am
Lance,
I think the argument about male circumcision is misguided, especially comparing it to female circumcision. There is still some medical evidence to suggest male circumcision has some positive health benefits, although there are some risks.
Hint Lance: feminists are not looking out for men's best interests. They are offering token gestures. Don't be taken in.
The one argument for male circumcision that I do find offensive is the claim that it helps reduce women's risk of cervical cancer. If it was found that altering female genitals reduced the risk of men picking up sexually transmitted illnesses, would people be having their daughters genitals altered simply for the benefit of future men who may sleep with them?
I think that it would be better for the MRM to focus on trying to ensure the best anaesthetics are used, to minimise any pain caused to boys.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:16 am
These are questions that I found in about 30 seconds
b
1. Has a man or boy ever made you have sex by using force or threatening to harm you or someone close to you? Just so there is no mistake, by sex we mean putting a penis in your vagina.
2. Has anyone ever made you have oral sex by force or threat of harm? Just so there is no mistake, by oral sex we mean that a man or boy put his penis in your mouth or somebody penetrated your vagina or anus with his mouth or tongue.
3. Has anyone ever made you have anal sex by force or threat of harm?
4. Has anyone ever put fingers or objects in your vagina or anus against your will by using force or threat?
8. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?
9. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force (twisting your arm, holding you down, etc.) to make you?
10. Have you had sexual acts (anal or oral intercourse or penetration by objects other than the penis) when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force (twisting your arm, holding you down, etc.) to make you?
February 27th, 2008 at 1:17 am
http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html
February 27th, 2008 at 1:30 am
http://books.google.com/books?id=0r7kGAbUWV8C&pg=PA59&lpg=PA59&dq=mary+koss+rape+study+questions&source=web&ots=hYu3XMZ6fu&sig=zYW4qY0qH9rZb2avW2P9cCAlL6k#PPT1,M1
I do find the above site interesting because the important pages are deleted
2) The discovery of a rape epidemic page 50
5) Unsexy sex: Unwanted sex, sexual coercion, and rape page 136
6) Can a woman be raped and not know it? page 169
and others
b
February 27th, 2008 at 1:34 am
Nick S there are also some benifits to removing tonsils and apendixes, and no real harm in removing spleens, half a liver, 1 kidney, or one of the lobes off of one lung
With modern medice there is no real harm in removing the pancreas either
And yet the only thing ever cut on new borns in 1st world countries is a penis
It is nothing more than a jewsh and christian form of genital mutilation, religious dogma.
Heres a question for you if "god" really wanter you dick to look like it does after circumsision why arent we born that way?
February 27th, 2008 at 1:45 am
It's not just that students don't call the crisis centers. It's personal experience..though of course that's "only anecdotal". In all my years in college, I never personally knew a female student who was raped, and I didn't know anyone else who knew of a female student who was raped. I know a woman would not necessarily talk about it, but I cannot believe that my experience is all due to women "suffering in silence". In all those years, it stands to reason that I should have heard of at least one case of campus rape, either in the student newspaper or through the grapevine.
And my sister, who attended college for eight years after me, and with whom I kept in close contact throughout most of her college years, never mentioned a case to me either; nor any of her roommates, some of whom I was friends with. And my sister is a feminist (or at least she was at the time).
I like how feminists cite anecdotal evidence as being valid when it agrees with their side, but will dismiss this comment as anecdotal out of hand.
[it's kind of like the "wage gap". Come on guys, lots of you have worked side by side with women for years or even decades. Don't you think you would have heard of at least one case, of a female coworker at your company being paid less than a man for the same work? Most workplaces have a "grapevine" through which you probably would have heard, if something like that happened. All I ever hear about is the Wal-Mart case, which the media rehashes every couple of years. ]
February 27th, 2008 at 1:48 am
"8. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?"
I'm surprised they forgot to ask "Have you ever had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you jewelry?"
They could have hit at least 50% if they added that one.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:52 am
Lance,
don't get your hopes up about campus women being against circumcision. Are you sure their reason isn't truly, because of some adverse health effect on women during sex? Or maybe increased pleasurable sensations for them? (I know there was a recent controversy about cervical cancer, but that particular study may have suggested that men should get circumcised. I can't remember.)
February 27th, 2008 at 2:00 am
Like Warren Farrell said, when he printed some of the results of the study done by Charles McDowell, Ph.D., in Myth of Male Power: the rate of false accusations shown was 60%, and 20% of those false accusations were made "for spite or revenge" (that reason being given by the women who made the false accusations ).
February 27th, 2008 at 7:53 am
And we wonder why boys and young men find going to college/university an undesirable option to better their lives? I think the article and Alex's pictures demonstrate the hostile environment that many young men wish to avoid. Sadly, the campus environment, hostage to the mindset of anti-male hysteria, is hurting us all by depriving society of young men who might otherwise engage in research, creativity and intellectual thought that could be of great benefit. This article stops at the college/university setting and doesn't touch on how it has filtered down to high schools and middle schools as well. Better to "castrate" potential with myths at an early age, and if need be, threaten to punitively sanction male miscreants by registering them as sex offenders. As FaFNY has found, posters and ad campaigns reflecting the anti-male hysteria receive endorsement and funding. Sad to think of those indoctrinated with the anti-male mindset, and engaged in practices that promote it, are parents to sons. So when these boys flock to the x-box skipping the homework, shoot up shoppers at a mall or classmates on campus, or add to the sad adolescent suicide statistics and we ask why- just maybe it is a result of a society trapped by a feminist model of education.
February 27th, 2008 at 8:17 am
Roy says
Davina --
So I understand from your posts, you are a mother of a son. I am the father of two daughters.
What do we have in common, given these ridiculous gender wars?
--------------------------------
I have not only a son, I have two sons and they're great.
Sad thing is that radical feminists will have me believe they're rapists and abusers waiting to happen.
That is a very terrible thing to tell a parent about their children, especially when they're not true of most boys/men.
As parents, perhaps that's the common ground?
February 27th, 2008 at 8:38 am
To write the LA Times and share thoughts about this article.
letters@latimes.com
February 27th, 2008 at 9:47 am
I'm surprised they forgot to ask "Have you ever had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you jewelry?"
They could have hit at least 50% if they added that one.
Be glad that I'm male, and therefore responsible for my own actions. Otherwise, I'd blame you for the coffee on my screen rather than blame my own choice to read this website ;)
As parents, perhaps that's the common ground?
To be honest, that's the only reason I give a shit about any of this. I don't want my son growing up thinking that he's nothing other than an evil male. I don't want my daughter growing up thinking she's weak and powerless. If it wasn't for them, I'd just take what I know and use it to my own advantage and not worry so much about what happens to other people.
When I talk to my mom about these things, she gives pretty much the same response. She tells me that she understands and believes, but it's not really worth the effort for her to fight against this as all of her children are in good places... we grew up knowing our lives were our responsibilities (helping the girls) and the boys have had their mistakes, learned from them, and changing the rules for us now won't help us as we won't put ourselves in those situations again. She at least votes with these concepts in mind, and to be honest that's all I can really ask of her. My dad, on the other hand, is just too far chilverous to contest feminism.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:04 am
Got a question: feminists claim to hate stereotypes about female passivity, but when it comes to alcohol or drugs at a party they suddenly start using PASSIVE VOICE. Women "are given" drugs or alcohol, not that the women TAKE them. The drinks pour themselves down women's throats and the joints just appear in their mouths and so on.
Anyone ever notice this before?
February 27th, 2008 at 10:27 am
Sungjun,
I agree with you wholeheartedly, the other issue I take with that particular question is the following.
Many women who are addicted to drugs will offer sexual favors for those drugs as opposed to paying full price... yet we are to believe that women who do such a thing are being raped by the person they are bartering with as opposed to recognizing it for what it is, her using a resource at her disposal to obtain something she wants (even if what she wants isn't legal or good for her).
There is a big difference between some guy slipping something into someones drink to incapacitate them and a woman using sex as a means to get something she wants even when sex isn't what she's actually interested in.
Yet that question would lump all of them into the same category.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:48 am
Nick S- Good point on how liberals view crime and oppression except if it is man vs woman.
It is the whole don't blame the victim, mentality on its ear because they get to choose who is and isn't a victim before there is a trial.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:52 am
8a. Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a woman gave you alcohol?
Yep, beer goggles.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:56 am
Norman, believe me: I was flabbergasted. I really was. There was no concomitant female-health (or otherwise) benefit they were trying to spin. Plain and simple, they were against it on the very true grounds that there is very little if any reason for it in the modern world, and there are a ton of minuses (such as decrease in MALE sexual gratification/sensitivity/etc), and that it IS genital mutilation.
Now does this mean they have my respect? Not likely. However, if they start taking a more egalitarian view on rape/DV/reproduction/etc then they will start gaining. But we all know the chances of that one!
Nick: "I think the argument about male circumcision is misguided, especially comparing it to female circumcision. There is still some medical evidence to suggest male circumcision has some positive health benefits, although there are some risks."
And there is some real medical evidence that suggests that male circumcision has a lot of negatives (see my parenthetical remark above). Most of the health benefits have been shown to be minimal at best (and complete fabrications at worst). The only two examples of "benefits" I have heard is for keeping things clean and for STDs. In terms of keeping things clean, this is a pretty clean world we live in so I don't even consider this to be a viable reason anymore. For STDs, I believe the jury is still out for that in the 1st world and any benefit in any world is just on the edge of statistical significance. All-in-all, not enough to support in my mind to let someone anywhere close to my (future) son with a knife.
Incidentally, I see very little difference between removing the penile-foreskin or the clitoral-hood - they should both be equally illegal and they are both equally destructive. Removal of the clitoris would be akin to removal of the penis (ie: they both come from the same stock) and I believe there is another word for that: castration.
February 27th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
I would think that with the levels they are claiming for campus rape that not only would you hear about through the grapevine (the maximum number of people who can keep a secret is said to be three but only if two are dead) people would frequently be witness to it and have to intervene. College campuses are pretty crowded places aren't they? Like the article mentions-- someone would notice. Or is that just the patriarchal blindness working?
February 27th, 2008 at 12:39 pm
Demonspawn, I have to say I'm disheartened by your response. In my experience your take on the issues we discuss here is exactly why 9/10 men scoff at the men's movement .... of course, that is until they end up in the hell that is divorce court, facing false rape/DV charges, losing their kids or property to vindictive ex-spouses hell bent on seeing them ruined etc.
And therein lies the advantage women tend to have over you guys ... a stronger sense of empathy for each other's plight. Men on the other hand empathise more with women's issues to the detriment of their own interests. The MRM has a shortage of support because men are either unaware or complacent, thereby disallowing change to be effected.
I'm happy to hear you're adjusting your attitude, even if it's just for your children.
Remember, if you don't vote, you don't have a right to complain after the election is over.
February 27th, 2008 at 1:02 pm
Lewis, you are missing the point entirely. How do we know rape is rampant on campus? According to the radical feminists we know it because no one reports it. Don't you get it? "Rape is one of the most underreported crimes," they chant. Of course, the mere fact that such "proof" proves nothing doesn't fit their victim-narrative, so they make up a conclusion they like even though it doesn't folllow from their "evidence."
What we have here is a crime that college women hardly ever report because they don't know a crime has been committed. Of course, the radical feminists would tell you that the men surely know they've committed rape even though the supposed victims don't. This is perhaps the first time in history where the radical feminists give men credit for being smarter than women.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:16 pm
Sorry, I do get it. I'm just not very articulate.
I had hoped to make a point along the lines of "If women make 77% what men make for the same work why do men have jobs."
If all these sexual assaults are happening why aren't there more witnesses? Is what I was trying to get at.
I do see thru the lie of it don't worry on that account.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:30 pm
University of California (Davis) officials estimated in a 1999 federal grant application that as many as 700 of its students are victims of rape or attempted rape each year.
But within months of submitting the application the University reported in its federally mandated crime report that there were no rapes or attempted rapes in 1998. The university crime statistics submitted to the FBI and the U.S. Department of Education under a law known as the Clery Act show only one rape from 1995 to 1998. ...
Lynette Temple, information practices coordinator for UC Davis, turned over the university’ s complete file on the federal grant, which included the application and correspondence. That application included the sentence: "And based on estimates from the National Victim Center, we believe that as many as 700 female students at UC Davis are the victims of rape or attempted rape each year." That number was extrapolated from those provided by The National Victim Center, which estimates that "approximately 1 in 20 college women are victims of rape or attempted rape each year" according to UC Davis’ grant application. The spokeswoman, Jennifer Beeman said during the application process in the summer of 1999 that the Justice Department officials asked her to amend the application several times and as a result she has a number of copies of the application; some with the sentence, some without.
...Department of Justice officials said there is only one version of the grant application in their records, and that document includes the 700 estimate. [Source: "UCD rape figures don’ t match" by Terri Hardy and Matthew Barrows, Bee Staff Writers Feb. 8, 2001 ]
Below are a couple of excellent examples of how far the advocacy establishment is prepared to go in order to falsify data.
Penn State University Police: Five out of 23 locations reported sexual offences during the three year period of 2001-2003:
• Berks Campus: 2 in 2003
• Erie Campus: 3 in 2003
• McKeesport : 1 in 2001
• Mont Alto: 3 in 2002; 1 in 2003
• University Park : 8 in 2001; 12 in 2002; 9 in 2003
• Total for the three year period: 39
Let us not ignore the fact that even these are as yet unverified reports made to police, not findings of guilt.
Based on anonymous and uninvestigated reports, an advocacy group called “Coalition to Address Relationship and Sexual Violence” claims that in 2001 there were an estimated 88 incidents at Penn State: in 2002 an estimated 91 incidents and in 2003 the estimated number was 109. Thus the estimated total for the three year period was 288. These unverified reports are supplied to the national victimization surveys which invariably are based on estimations of anonymous self reports rather than factual data. The coalition writes:
Sexual Assault Information
• "In an effort to more clearly determine the impact of sexual assault on Penn State students, the University’s Coalition to Address Relationship and Sexual Violence has developed a system of anonymous and confidential reporting of sexual assault. This information is collected to estimate the frequency of sexual assaults that are reported to University officials, the general nature of these offenses and the services provided to victims. Except for those incidents that were reported to police, no investigation of these offenses is conducted. These incidents are not categorized on the basis of legal definition beyond sexual assault because detailed information about the incident is not solicited from victims. The information is collected regardless if the incident occurred on or off campus."
What better way to get someone into trouble. In order to understand the motives behind the discrepancy of the various sources of information we have to understand the difference between male and female aggression. Anonymous reports fit neatly in the category of female, i.e. indirect, aggression.
Indirect aggression refers to a form of social manipulation where the target is attacked circuitously and the aggressor can therefore remain unidentified. It involves acts such as shunning, stigmatising and gossiping. Girls are more likely to exclude newcomers than are boys (Feshbach 1969), to destroy their adversary's property or tell tales on them (Brodzinsky, Messer & Tew 1979) and to use tactics of ostracising and manipulating public opinion (Cairns, Cairns, Neckerman, Ferguson & Gariepy 1989). Girls are significantly higher than boys on becoming friendly with someone else as revenge, gossiping and suggesting shunning of another (Björkqvist, Lagerspetz & Kaukiainen 1992; Crick & Grotpeter 1995). Studies of school bullying also report that girls preferentially employ indirect strategies (Ahmad & Smith 1994). Female use of indirect aggression continues into adulthood. Björkqvist, Österman and Lagerspetz (1994), investigating victimisation in the workplace, found that women more than men used indirect forms such as spreading false rumours and not speaking. The tendency for girls and women to employ indirect means is not associated with greater condemnation of the use of direct physical and verbal aggression by females (Österman, Björkqvist, Lagerspetz, Kaukiainen, Huesmann & Fraczek 1994).
Another example is the New York State University, Plattsburgh State Campus Crime Statistics. It specifies in its “Campus Judicial Process”:
• "Where there is probable cause to believe the college's regulations prohibiting bias/hate, sexual assault, domestic violence and/or stalking have been violated, the college will pursue judicial sanctions. Judicial Sanctions may include suspension or dismissal from the college. (Criminal charges may result in fines and /or incarceration.)A campus publication “Sexual Assault, bias, Domestic Violence and Stalking Crimes, What Every Student Should Know” includes information about campus security procedures and practices.During the campus judicial process, the victim's rights, in cases involving the above-described violations, are:To have a person of the victim's choice accompany the victim throughout the disciplinary hearing. To make a "victim impact statement" and to suggest an appropriate penalty if the accused is found responsible in the violation of the regulation.To be informed immediately of the outcome of the hearing.To remain present during the entire proceeding.If a victim has been sexually assaulted his or her irrelevant past sexual history will not be discussed during the hearing.The rights of the accused student during the judicial process are described in the "Student Conduct Manual", Section III."
Statistics on reported, but not verified, sex offences:
• 2005: Forcible: 4; Non-forcible: 0
• 2004: Forcible: 9; Non-forcible: 0
• 2003: Forcible: 3; Non-forcible: 0
• 2002: Forcible: 4; Non-forcible: 1
• 2001: Forcible: 2; Non-forcible: 2
The two examples below show how universities that demand corroborative evidence are swiftly silenced. Instead of “sufficient independent corroboration” Harvard now requires only “supporting information”:
“OCR Issues Decision In Harvard “Corroboration Rule Case” by Wendy J. Murphy, J.D. Visiting Scholar, Harvard Law School:
• "In August 2002, the Department of Education’s Office for Civil Rights (OCR) initiated a formal investigation of Harvard University because of its new rule requiring sexual assault victims on campus to produce ‘sufficient independent corroboration’ as a prerequisite to a full investigation and adjudicative resolution of their claims. Since the inception of OCR’s investigation, Harvard has substantially revised its policy. When revisions were completed, OCR issued its ruling finding no violation of Title IX and ‘closing the case’ on April 1, 2003. This indicates that OCR would not accept the use of the word ‘corroboration’ in the standard and that ‘supporting information’ need not rise to the level of ‘corroborative’ evidence.The new policy provides that even if the victim produces absolutely nothing but her word, and even if a long time has passed since the incident, the accused student must submit a written response and the entire matter must be provided to the full Ad Board for their review and placement in their files."
"Campuses May Be Developing Tactics to Hide Rapes"
• “In a vote Tuesday, May 20 [2003], a special faculty committee appointed to review the policy reversed course and agreed to replace ‘corroborating evidence’ with ‘as much information as possible.’ The members also approved recommendations from the student-faculty committee to Address Sexual Assault at Harvard for a new office for sexual assault prevention and the expansion of rape awareness education. A year ago, the student activist group the Coalition against Sexual Violence rejected Harvard's new rule as overly burdensome, arguing that sexual assaults rarely have such evidence."
Under the current politically correct assumption that men lie and women don’t it is even harder to get corroborative evidence to prove that the rape did not happen.
Note: Though the data refer to estimates which are based on self reported incidents, not established facts, they are reported as findings of fact. To quote the “Violent Victimization of College Students”, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1995-2000 December 2003, NCJ 196143:
• "Serious violent crime includes all types except simple assault: rape/sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault. Definitions are as follows: Rape is forced sexual intercourse, including both psychological coercion and physical force.Sexual assault covers a wide range of victimizations distinct from rape or attempted rape. These crimes include completed or attempted attacks generally involving unwanted sexual contact between the victim and offender. Sexual assaults may or may not involve force and include such things as grabbing or fondling. Sexual assault also includes verbal threats."
The report also documented that the average annual rate of overall violent crime against female college students (47 per 1,000) was about half that of male college students (91 per 1,000). The average rate of overall violent crime against female non-students (78 per 1,000) was about 11% less than that of male non-students (87 per 1,000), 1995-2000. The average rate of [alleged] rape/sexual assault against female students was 6.2 per 1,000 and against non-students 7.9 per 1,000 (Table 1).
According to the survey, based on self-reported alleged incidents, the estimated average annual number of rapes and sexual assaults between the years 1995 and 2000 was 31,230 (tables 3 and 7). Out of these estimated 3,890 incidents were said to have been reported to police, estimated 26,910 were allegedly not reported to the police and the status of estimated 430 reported incidents is unknown.
If the estimated 26,910 were not reported to the police, nor were they investigated (see the Penn State Coalition statement above) how do we know that they actually happened?
UM [University of Montana] officials:
• Rape under-reported:
"There have been three legitimate rape reports made to Public Safety in 2004.Public Safety has received zero to three rape reports each year since 1992, according to the annual crime report UM began releasing that year. There were three rapes reported this year and in both 1998 and 1999. In 2003, one rape was reported.Concerns about sexual assault on campus were brought to the forefront of University discussion last semester after five rapes or sexual assaults were reported to Public Safety. A rape report that turned out to be false rekindled discussion this semester.Assistant Director of Public Safety Jim Lemcke said it is not uncommon for the number of reports to fluctuate from year to yearLemcke said he has dealt with many cases during his career in which a man convinces a woman to have sex and the woman contacts the police because she feels bad the next morning.‘Legally it’s not a rape because she consented to it at some point,’ Lemcke said. There is still a guy acting slimy, but the woman consented, which means the definition of rape might not apply, Lemcke said. The definitions of coercion, deception and surprise are decided on a case-by-case basis, he said.Lyda said stranger rape has always had a higher reporting rate than acquaintance rape because the victim sometimes fears the consequences for the offender." ..."‘Acquaintance rapes usually involve alcohol so victims might fear repercussions dealing with that as well, but he had never heard of any time when an underage person had been punished for drinking after reporting being raped,’ Lyda said."
(Note below in Karjane et al. the claim that ‘victims’ do not report because they do not believe that the perpetrator would be punished. Cannot have it both ways)
Another story in the Missoulian (2004/05/04) called “UM student charged for false report” by Michael Moore, would correlate the above, namely that there are more false reports than there are valid ones:
• "University of Montana freshman has been charged with filing a false police report after claiming she was grabbed and robbed by a man outside Aber Hall late Friday night.Jim Lemcke, captain of UM Safety and Security, said the young woman, 18-year-old Emily Clark, told officers she had been dropped off by friends outside the dorm and was robbed as she headed inside.Lemcke said Clark used the basic facts of a previously reported assault outside Aber, including a description of the suspect and the claim that he emerged from the bushes near the dorm's main entry.The woman said the man - described as 6 feet 3 inches tall, with a dark complexion - grabbed her and took $100.During the investigation, however, officers interviewed friends of Clark's who said that they had walked her into the dorm. Lemcke said the friends were concerned about Clark because she had been drinking."They said that they had walked into the dorm with her," Lemcke said. "We talked with her yesterday again with the facts of the investigation, and it became clear that she had made this up."The charge filed against Clark is a misdemeanor and she will appear in Municipal Court once the ticket is filed, Lemcke said.The false report comes in the wake of a wave of similar reports. A Missoula city police detective is still investigating a report of a rape on April 18. In that case, a woman said she was grabbed by two men and raped in the parking lot of Aber Hall. One of the men was described as Clark described her would-be assailant.Two days later, on April 20, another student reported that she was grabbed by a man who emerged from the bushes. That woman had a similar description of the suspect, but she did not claim to have been harmed, Lemcke said.A third open case occurred March 10, when a woman claimed that a man had tried to pull her into his car as she walked near the student recreation center on the north side of campus. That case is no longer being actively investigated.The flurry of reports followed a March 6 assault where a woman was abducted and raped after giving a man a ride from the Miller Hall parking lot. A suspect, 24-year-old Brock Norling, has been charged in that case."
Manufacturing Victims.
“Campus Sexual Assault: How America’s Institutions of Higher Education Respond” by Heather M. Karjane, Bonnie S. Fisher, Francis T. Cullen:
• "The Clery Act crime classifications include murder, sex offenses, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, motor vehicle theft, manslaughter, arson, and violations relating to alcohol, drugs, and weapons as defined by the Uniform Crime Reporting program (UCR) of the Federal Bureau of Investigation (USOJ, 1992). The Clery Act further requires institutions to distinguish between forcible and nonforcible sex offenses.
• The following UCR definitions apply to these discrete sex crimes:Forcible Rape: the carnal knowledge of a person, forcibly and/or against that person’s will or not forcibly or against the person’s will where the victim is incapable of giving consent because of her or his temporary or permanent mental or physical incapacity (or because of his or her youth).women who experience events that meet the legal definition of rape and sexual assault frequently do not label their victimization as such, particularly when weapons are absent, alcohol is present, and/or physical damage (e.g., choke marks, bruises) is not apparent - the predominant scenario for acquaintance rape (Bondurant, 2001).Research has shown that the victim’s ability to name the experience is dependent on the reactions of those to whom she or he first discloses the assault (Pitts & Schwartz, 1997; Bondurant, 2001; Schwartz & DeKeseredy, 1997). When asked during field research interviews what distinguishes those who report from those who do not report, victim advocates, police officers, and campus officials uniformly asserted that victims who report are encouraged to do so by their friends, who frequently accompany them when they make the report to campus and/or criminal justice authorities. [p.83]Student victims of campus sexual assault, especially when the assault is perpetrated by someone they know, do not report, in part, because they do not believe that the perpetrator will be punished. [p.86]"
Tina Oakland, the coordinator of the UCLA Sexual Assault Response Team, explains:
• "It’s difficult for the women themselves to define what happened to them as assault. They need help to understand it."
Surely, if a woman is intelligent enough to be admitted to an institute of higher learning, she is intelligent enough to understand what constitutes assault.
Tina Oakland’s remark is nothing short of infantilizing all women as an identifiable group. The authors continue:
• "UCSC, similar to all of the field research schools, offers students a variety of options to file a report: anonymous, confidential, and third party. An anonymous report is filed without the inclusion of the victim’s name. Some basic information about the circumstances is collected in order to distinguish the incident from any others without identifying the victim by name. The use of an anonymous reporting option is widely credited by administrators as increasing the reports of assault that are included in the school’s annual security report statistics."
Related Data.
False allegations about campus rape and sexual assaults are closely related to all false allegations about intimate partner violence. Murray Straus in his “Gender Symmetry In Prevalence, Severity, AndChronicity Of Physical Aggression Against Dating Partners By University Students In Mexico And USA” correlates the findings by Debra Pepler which show that young women and girls are far more violent than men in their intimate relationships. His findings are revealing even if, as an avowed feminist, Dr. Straus does not explore indirect violence, i.e. false allegations.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:36 pm
I know you get it, Lewis. I was just kidding. You get it very well. "The maximum number of people who can keep a secret is said to be three but only if two are dead" -- says it better than I could.
In addition: "If women make 77% what men make for the same work why do men have jobs." I couldn't agree more.Men wouldn't have jobs -- unless they'd drop their salary demands accordingly.
February 27th, 2008 at 2:54 pm
EVa, Wow! Thanks for the great post. I printed it and will keep it on hand for reference.
February 27th, 2008 at 3:13 pm
Demonspawn, I have to say I'm disheartened by your response.
Think about it from a logical perspective. What do I gain from the enormous effort to change society that I could not more easily gain from simply changing my own behaviors? If my children were not involved, very very little. So what would be the motivation for me to go thru all the extra effort to obtain those goals? I might be able to help other men and women, but I'm also faced by the "lead a horse to water" problem. I can't help them unless they want to help themselves. I can't control other people. My feelings and emotions are not their responsibilities.
And therein lies the advantage women tend to have over you guys ... a stronger sense of empathy for each other's plight.
Well of course they do ;) There's easily traceable reasons behind this. Look back to survival cultures. Men succeed by competing against each other. Women succeed by assisting each other with the demands that life requires. Women (who control reproduction) chose more successful men (more competitive men) to produce children with. Male competition against each other is naturally-selected into human nature. That is what makes nations strong. That is what makes countries able to resist outside domination. That is what has left men wholly unprepared for the current gender war.
Men on the other hand empathise more with women's issues to the detriment of their own interests. The MRM has a shortage of support because men are either unaware or complacent, thereby disallowing change to be effected.
Yes, men do what they are trained and breed to do. For eons, men have been the disposable piece of society that made it safe, women, by virtue of being tied to children, are the better interests of society that men have been made disposable to protect. That's why the women's movement had less resistance.. women wanted it and men wanted to protect, help, and provide for those women. But to allow men to break from their roles takes reprograming away from eons of human experience: that men are no longer the providers and protectors for women. Women don't want that, and men don't want to have attitudes that cause women to shun them. Women's rights is a win-win (women get rights, men get women by providing those rights).. men's rights is a lose-lose (women are no longer protected, men don't get women by refusing to provide for them). That's why men's rights is so very much resisted by both men and women.
February 27th, 2008 at 4:03 pm
Davina suggested there was some "common ground" due to us both being parents.
I'm not so sure.
So, I have to pose this question....
What do your sons and my daughters have in common?
I really like how you write, and so that is why I ask open-ended questions....
February 27th, 2008 at 5:15 pm
Eva – great post, thanks for the facts and figures!
February 27th, 2008 at 6:13 pm
I'm graduating from college in May. During the whole time I've been here, there has only been one rape case associated with the school. It involved a girl who, after getting a restraining order against her ex-girlfriend, agreed to see her again, agreed to go back to her apartment with her, agreed that they could have sex, let her ex-girlfriend tie her up, and changed her mind. I feel bad for this girl, who obviously has some deep problems, but I find it interesting that people at my school spend a lot of time talking about how rape is such a prevalent problem and this is the one case we've ever had in four years.
February 27th, 2008 at 6:55 pm
Some girls are never on time....
February 27th, 2008 at 9:31 pm
Marauder did I read you correctly? The only rape to go public in 4 or 5 years was a girl on girl rape? And it was her changing her mind? After violating her own restraining order? I want to laugh out loud at that but know I'd hate myself for taking pleasure in someones pain. They met while in the Women's Studies program didn't they?
How big a school?
February 27th, 2008 at 9:33 pm
Demonspawn Says: "Women's rights is a win-win (women get rights, men get women by providing those rights).. men's rights is a lose-lose (women are no longer protected, men don't get women by refusing to provide for them). That's why men's rights is so very much resisted by both men and women."
I don't know that I go with resisted but more a "I'm not going there attitude." But that is still spot on.
February 27th, 2008 at 10:45 pm
I would actually disagree quite wholeheartedly on that one. The reason why more men (and women for that matter) do not support the MRA causes is most likely due to lack of education, or exposure. Tell most men they have no reproductive rights, they'll deny it's true right up until you show them it is, then they revert to "My girlfriend would never do that though, she's not like that".
The truth is, most people (when they listen that is) simply don't believe us. At all....
February 27th, 2008 at 11:42 pm
Oh well Lance, I guess almost anything's possible.
February 28th, 2008 at 9:16 am
Dan M Says: " would actually disagree quite wholeheartedly on that one. The reason why more men (and women for that matter) do not support the MRA causes is most likely due to lack of education, or exposure. Tell most men they have no reproductive rights, they'll deny it's true right up until you show them it is, then they revert to "My girlfriend would never do that though, she's not like that".
The truth is, most people (when they listen that is) simply don't believe us. At all...."
I think that is a fair point. My experience is that the "don't go there attitude" comes after the explanation. If I were Morpheus they'd take the blue pill. No one really wants the red one.
(The blue pill is the one that kept you in the computer in "The Matrix" right?)
February 28th, 2008 at 11:39 am
I think that is a fair point. My experience is that the "don't go there attitude" comes after the explanation. If I were Morpheus they'd take the blue pill. No one really wants the red one.
And why do they take the blue pill? What is the cost of taking the red pill.. usually that they will come to have attitudes that their current GF / Wife will dislike, and that will create disharmony in their relationship. That's why they will not only not desire to hear it, but some will outright reject the truth even if you place it in front of them (they'll excuse female behavior somehow).
That's why I don't approach married / deeply committed men with messages about how feminism is destroying their rights... the minuscule chances that they will even listen to what I have to say outweighs the cost of my effort to bring it to their attention when there are people who will be much more receptive to the truth.
February 28th, 2008 at 12:26 pm
Demonspawn said: "And why do they take the blue pill? What is the cost of taking the red pill.. usually that they will come to have attitudes that their current GF / Wife will dislike, and that will create disharmony in their relationship. That's why they will not only not desire to hear it, but some will outright reject the truth even if you place it in front of them (they'll excuse female behavior somehow)."
Agreed. I was talking awhile back to someone and what I was saying actually seemed painful to him.
February 28th, 2008 at 8:52 pm
There is an ad-homneim laced response to the MacDonald piece.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oew-macdonald27feb27,0,6130673.story
I found the link to the Justice Dept pdf file interesting. Page 17 of the pdf file but which I think is actually page 10 of the report had this:
"At first glance, one might conclude that the risk of rape victimization for college women is not high; “only” about 1 in 36 college women (2.8 percent) experience a completed rape or attempted rape in an academic year. Such a conclusion, however, misses critical, and potentially disquieting, implications. The figures measure victimization for slightly more than half a year (6.91 months). Projecting results beyond this reference period is problematic for a number of reasons, such as assuming that the risk of victimization is the same during summer months and remains stable over a person’s time in college. However, if the 2.8 percent victimization figure is calculated for a 1-year period, the data suggest that nearly 5 percent (4.9 percent) of college women are victimized in any given calendar year. Over the course of a college career—which now lasts an average of 5 years—the percentage of completed or attempted rape victimization among women in higher educational institutions might climb to between one-fifth and one-quarter.18
Somebody help me out here. How did they get from 2.8% during the academic year to between one-fifth and one quarter? I'm dumbfounded. The 2.8% does increase to the 4.9% extended to twelve months which of course assumes that the rate remains the same when school is out for the summer. How did that get to one-quarter?
February 28th, 2008 at 9:36 pm
Lewis --- Being dumbfounded by feminism is the first step towards enlightenment....
Progress onward, grasshopper!
"Forwards ever, backwards never!"
February 28th, 2008 at 10:29 pm
Well I knew there were lies and exaggerations but I didn't know there were LIES and EXAGGERATIONS.
The person in the counter to Macdonald is bringing the pdf I found that in: http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf as proof that Macdonald is wrong when it looks to me like it says Macdonald has a really good point. Obviously no one who is reporting on this stuff has actually looked at the reports being cited.
"I hear the grasshopper." Master Po is the man!!!
February 29th, 2008 at 10:04 am
How many men here have been "raped" because they had sex with someone when they really didn't want to due to the use of drugs and/or alcohol?
I guess women can rape after all!
February 29th, 2008 at 10:38 am
Mr.-M: "I guess women can rape after all!"
Sure, IF they were consistent, they should define female-on-male rape as any time a man and a woman are drunk together or when a man is drunk and a woman is not. The problem is, they generally aren't very consistent. If both "perpetrators" are drunk, they will still usually put more responsibility on the man...I seem to remember someone coming here this past summer and posting the "50 point" rape list or whatever, and I remember one of those points specifically said that you (ie: the man) may still have raped her if you were both drunk. Now I have heard some people might admit that if she is sober and he is dunk (but not belligerent, violent, whatever - ie: being a good boy), then she MIGHT have raped him....but just MIGHT. The problem with their definitions of rape is that they feel that they are the only ones that are allowed to define the term "rape". So while they may pay lip-service to the idea that men can be raped too, to them it is an anomaly.
Here's there response to the article. You can see how one-sided they are (especially when someone comes to the defense of the writer!).
http://feministing.com/archives/008670.html
Notice how many commentators specifically say that many women don't realize they have been raped...that these alleged-victims are simply delusional. They even say that it is sad that rape has become so prevalent that women have become accustomed to it. Please! Rape is a horrible, terrible crime and should be punished to fullest extent of the law. But if you know you had sex, but you don't "know" you have been raped, then you probably weren't raped. Who are these people to define MY (or anyone else's) feelings and experiences?
As Paul Atreides says in Dune: "you [manipulative bunch of women] take a lot on yourselves".
February 29th, 2008 at 11:09 am
Lewis: "Somebody help me out here. How did they get from 2.8% during the academic year to between one-fifth and one quarter? I'm dumbfounded. The 2.8% does increase to the 4.9% extended to twelve months which of course assumes that the rate remains the same when school is out for the summer. How did that get to one-quarter?"
2.8%/6.91mo = 0.4%/mo * 12mo = 4.9%/yr * 5yr = 24.3%
There are three very key assumptions that I think need to be visited:
(0) The 2.8%/school year seems a bit questionable. Where are they getting these numbers? I've been living next to a major (read: HUGE) university since the 90's. There are only a few cases a year ever reported. At 2.8% I would need to see 1,120 cases PER SCHOOL YEAR or 162 cases PER MONTH or over 5 cases PER DAY in the "police blotter"...uh...doesn't happen folks. I just don't buy it. If that were happening, my wife would never leave the house.
(1) As the article says, it is a very questionable assumption that the risk is the same all year round. I don't know about you, but when I was in college, I partied MUCH harder during the school year when I was hanging out with my friends then I did in the summer.
(2) And perhaps most importantly: the (4.9%/yr * 5yr) is flat out wrong as it assumes the same woman won't be raped more then once. IF the 4.9% of women/yr is correct, then you would need to account for "double/triple counting". In the laxidazical manner in which they are defining "rape" the same woman could be raped every month...geez, every week when she goes out partying. And let me tell you, these girls party. There is absolutely nothing wrong with them partying (I'm pretty liberal when it comes to that kind of thing), but partying does not equal raping.
February 29th, 2008 at 12:34 pm
My problem is the whole math problem they used. Roughly 17% of the dice rolls on a six sided die come up one each month. That does not translate to 17%*60 months= 1020% of the dice rolls come up 1 over 5 years. Or even 17%/ month X 12 months= 204% per year.
That seems to me to be flat out wrong for a number of reasons other than counting the same victim twice and so on.
February 29th, 2008 at 3:01 pm
[...] recent controversy over the feminist "1 in 4 college women are raped" myth, see my recent blog post 'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualti.... I noted that "the ladies at www.Feministing.com have responded with boiling rage and [...]
February 29th, 2008 at 3:16 pm
The important thing with feminist "statistics" is that they're catchy, and they make sense on the surface to most laymen. 1 in4, 1 in 9, etc.... No one really explores where the information comes from....witness the 2% claim...
March 2nd, 2008 at 3:59 pm
[...] recent controversy over the feminist "1 in 4 college women are raped" myth, see my recent blog post 'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualti... or click [...]
March 4th, 2008 at 10:57 am
Here are the questions from the
National Violence Against Women Survey
U.S. Department of Justice
Office of Justice Programs
National Institute of Justice
Survey Screening Questions
Rape: Five questions were used to screen
respondents for completed and attempted
rape victimization:a
1. [Female respondents only] Has a man or
boy ever made you have sex by using force
or threatening to harm you or someone
close to you? Just so there is no mistake,
by sex we mean putting his penis in your
vagina.
2. Has anyone, male or female, ever made you
have oral sex by using force or threat of
force? Just so there is no mistake, by oral
sex we mean that a man or boy put his penis
in your mouth or someone, male or female,
penetrated your vagina or anus with their
mouth.
3. Has anyone ever made you have anal sex by
using force or threat of force? Just so there
is no mistake, by anal sex we mean that a
man or boy put his penis in your anus.
4. Has anyone, male or female, ever put
fingers or objects in your vagina or anus
against your will or by using force or
threats?
5. Has anyone, male or female, ever attempted
to make you have vaginal, oral, or anal sex
against your will but intercourse or penetration
did not occur?
If a male stops when a woman says “no” he is still a rapist for "attempting" to have intercourse, and she is still a victim.
March 4th, 2008 at 12:29 pm
False accusations are great! They lead to false convictions! Convivctions (true or false) for sex crimes lead to sex offenders for life which is great since then we can show maps indicating sex offenders are everywhere (thus indicating the need for greater fear and more incarceration!
The reason sex offenders are supposed to regitser for life is supposedly becuase it is claimed they have the higest rates of repaet offenders among criminals. Of course with the levels of false accusations and false convictions for sex crimes, sex offenders have lower rates of repeat offenses of any kind, sexual or otherwise.
60% recidivism for all felony criminals and only 50% recidivism for sex offender felony criminals.
March 5th, 2008 at 8:04 am
I remember my freshman year in college, my roomate (from Japan) warned me about going to the parking lot alone at nite. I thought it was such a ridiculous comment - I never even thought about being unsafe. Her friends attempted to pull me in to their little group of victimhood, and were aptly shunned. I moved out of the dorm mid-semester - living with a bunch of girls who thought men were evil took its toll. I eventually left that college as well, for a private Christian university, where a person's worth was recognized and strengths were accentuated. There weren't rallys or girls' groups or poster sessions alledging male dominance and violence against women. I think that since the focus was primarily on "right living" and academics, there just simply wasn't any room nor tolerance for such a distraction. There were rules of a different nature of course, but it held males as well as females accountable for their actions (dancing is a no-no because it's considered seductive, males and females were not to pray together because it may cause them to share an intimate moment which crosses a boundary etc. that kind of thing). Granted, most religions perceive the male as the stronger, more dominant, responsible figure - but at least the university I attended never blamed men for women's oppression not did it treat women as victims. While organized religions are a whole other subject, I guess my point is that thankfully, not all universities are spreading such inane "statistics" about the "1 in 4" jibe, which I don't believe is accurate, either.
In my practice, I am always wary of the females who claim "rape" - there is almost always a story of a drunken nite "gone wrong" or adultery or coercive attempts of some nature. Usually, the husband has threatened to leave, and these women are looking for an excuse for what they've done, rather than just being accountable. It's sad, and it has conditioned me to be somewhat biased. While I always have an open mind, more often than not the woman's definition of rape far exceeds the true definition of actual force. Getting drunk and having sex has been one of the biggest defenses used to alledge rape. Women have been reinforced by the legal system to use this, and this has also supported the level of hypervigilance in the whole sexual harrassment hysteria. Honestly, I think a lot of women believe that they aren't allowed to enjoy sex without risking being labeled a whore, so they get scared and deny their own actions and desires with excuses. I honestly think a fair majority of women only use alcohol or other mood-altering substances in order to act on those desires, to lose those inhibitions. But then they can't take responsibility for it. Maybe this happens more in America than elsewhere b/c people here are so freaked out about sex and nudity - everything is "dirty" and shame comes early in one's development, for males and females. I think that the lack of freedom of expression has resulted in pathological suppression of sexuality. It's no wonder Catholic priests act out - we're meant to be sexual, and if we can't express that in a safe and healthy way, it will manifest in some kind of pathological behavior. Eventually leads to hysteria and hypervigilance.
March 5th, 2008 at 10:36 am
[...] recent controversy over the feminist "1 in 4 college women are raped" myth in my recent blog post 'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualti.... I noted that "the ladies at www.Feministing.com have responded with boiling rage and [...]
March 6th, 2008 at 1:05 pm
[...] recent controversy over the feminist "1 in 4 college women are raped" myth in my recent blog post 'It’s a lonely job, working the phones at a college rape crisis center...you wait for the casualti.... I [...]