Feminist 'Hate Statistics' on Display at George Washington University
March 2nd, 2008 by Glenn Sacks, MA for Fathers & Families
How should we describe the false, male-vilifying statistics that are ubiquitous on the modern college campus? Christina Hoff Sommers, author of Who Stole Feminism? calls them "Hate Statistics." That seems apt.
To follow the 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 casualties to show up but no one calls' or click here.
The photo above was taken at George Washington University in Washington, D.C. by Alex, a reader. Such displays can be seen at practically every university.
"));
19 queries. 0.525 seconds.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:05 pm
If you can get the university to deem false stats "hate speech" you can probably get this removed.
However...stats THIS over the top court ridicule. The "every two minutes" stat is so ludicrous that an 18-year-old college boy has to know this is false. Wouldn't simple math tell you that if a woman was raped every two minutes in a decade or less, they'd all be raped?
Can someone do the math here?
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:18 pm
"42% of college women who are raped do not tell anyone about the assault"
Interesting... if they don't tell *anyone* though... how are these statistics being compiled.
It leaves me to wonder why they are missing the associated statistic that "The sexual activities of all college women are monitored by stalkers 24 hours a day without their knowledge".
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:19 pm
Yes, counter this with a “Hate Speech” protest to the appropriate school officials.
The numbers are pure fabrications. They were born of fabrications to fuel hate mongering. They are not “discredited” or “refuted” as they were never factual to begin with.
This is bold-faced “Hate Speech” that must be taken down and the perpetrators severely disciplined if this hate mongering is to be stopped.
DanH
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:23 pm
Constant exposure to women-as-victim agit-prop has caused some now serious equal protection violations for men/fathers/boys.
Easilly impressionable men who are exposed to this type of misleading agit-prop become the "mis-placed protectors" who not unlike modern day Don quiote's ...seek to super protect women at the expense of mens basic civil rigths..
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:24 pm
Glen - Check out the anti-father art at the family courthouse in Olympia, WA. Click on the website link above.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:27 pm
Those that publish this faulty, inflamatory, agit-prop should be held accounteable to the men/fathers/boys who have been harmed by the cultural hysteria it "agitates".
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:37 pm
Jason: ""The sexual activities of all college women are monitored by stalkers 24 hours a day without their knowledge"."
HAHAHA...where do I sign up for that job??
Seriously though, you're spot on. We understand the statistical concept of extrapolation, but extrapolations are notoriously difficult to nail down with any level of accuracy..and "accurate" extrapolations are wholly dependent upon the quality of your model. As far as I can tell, as per our discussion concerning the underreporting of rape (see link below for context), they are already working with something they think is ORDERS of magnitude off. I just don't buy it. I could just as easily double all of their numbers.
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1871#comment-167372
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
"1% of males who rape are prosecuted"
Ok, what percentage of females who rape are prosecuted? If you are going to be egalitarian, you better at least ask the question.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
"Hate statistics" is perfect. The same crap is spewed at UCLA, where I have two sons attending. I am afraid for them, given the atmosphere of fear and distrust which is spawned. They were each "indoctrinated" as to what potential date-rapists they were as entering freshmen. I asked later if there had been any mention of the possibility of a false allegation, and how to protect oneself from that situation? They told me that this was completely ignored. The problem is, until that conversation with me, they had not even really questioned the balance and fairness of this "orientation" which was forced on them.
I don't care what "wave" feminism is in. It is the source of this unrelenting garbage, and is, as Glenn adroitly brings to our attention, nothing but a hate movement designed to measure the progress of women by the degradation and subjugation of men. Anyone claiming to desire egalitarian treatment of men and women can not associate with the term, which inherently promotes gender division and hostility.
I am disappointed, angry, resentful, and sad about the way that, during my adult lifetime, feminism has infected society, fomenting gender war, and leaving wrecked families in its wake. I pity women for the damage being done to their actual position in society -- they are being increasingly turned from wives into wage slaves or virtual wards of the state, as men are turned from husbands into financial slaves of the state, all for women's "benefit." It is not women's strength which has been institutionalized, but women's weakness. I hope women turn out to be stronger than feminism gives them credit for. (And the great ladies who post on this site are virtual rays of hope in an otherwise bleak landscape.)
As much for women's actual benefit as men's, if not more, feminism must be actively condemned, opposed and extinguished, and only then can the family and relationship-wrecking machinery of feminism be dismantled. I don't enjoy being "at war," but I feel compelled to fight for my own marriage, for my sons and daughter, and for the grandchildren which I am increasingly unlikely to ever have. There is just something about the destruction of a decent society that bugs me ... . And if an angry man is just too much to take, too bad. You get your motivation where you find it, I'll get mine where I find it.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:42 pm
In 2006, University of Pittsburgh Campus Police received one — I repeat: one — report of sexual assault. That’s one sexual assault report, in one entire year, from a campus of roughly 18,000 young women. Even pretending that one-in-four stat were correct — and we know by now that it’s not, but for the moment, let’s pretend — young women at Pitt should have suffered roughly 4,500 sexual assaults in 2006. Even if you cut that number by one-fourth again, figuring that the numbers should correspond not to the whole campus but to a single class moving through a four-year cycle at the university, young women at Pitt still should have suffered roughly 1,125 sexual assaults in 2006. And yet they reported one. Which means, of course, that if we are to believe — and, of course, we don’t, but for the moment, let’s pretend — that absurd, discredited, yet still oft-cited, oft-repeated, (and oft-mutated) one-in-four statistic, then sexual assaults at the University of Pittsburgh in 2006 were under-reported by 99.98%. Or at least by 99.91%.
These women are nuttier than the folks who claim they were abducted by aliens.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:49 pm
Tim, and considering that Pitt is in the middle of a questionable part of town (if I remember right), this makes one question the stats all the more!
If these numbers were right, our daughters/wives would never leave the house (under their own volition).
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
Sexual harassment and anti-discrimination laws to which universities are subject include provisions against creating a "hostile and intimidating environment..." for either gender.
I think it would be worthwhile to explore a class action suit by young men against the institutionalized campus hostility towards males and the administrative neglect of fiduciary responsibility to provide a safe and non-discriminatory environment.
If "a woman is raped every two minutes" that leaves very little time to do anything other than rape.
That would be very detrimental for any alleged rapist's GPA or chances of graduating.
This feminist hysterical proaganda must end.
Call Senator Joe Biden and let him know you are tired of it.
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:55 pm
I am also currently in the university system, and I see displays like that quite often. One showed a picture of a man with a perfectly erect umbrella depicting a privleged man keeping the rain off his head. The poor female had a broken umbrella and the rain came down on her. Poor gal! Too bad it isnt true, and it should have shown the male having hail coming down on his head!
In fact, I have even tried complaining about them to the uni gate-keepers.......only to no-avail. In fact, one of the people I complained to told me that complaining aobut it would so any good because nobody would believe me anyway that males face discrimination in society.
It is interesting who is responsble for these displays. In my situation, it was a hard-core feminist think-tank that actually went above campus policy and did not author the display with their name.............hmmmm. These same people came out of the woodwork and militantly opposed the ND shared parenting initiative as well.
Hey alex.........hopefully you won't let that crap get you down. I know exactly what it is like to see a display like that!! It made me feel sick inside.
Keep up the good work alex.
MXY
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
Am I reading this wrong or is this to encourage men to rape? This is sickening, but the second and third line just got me going here...
So bear with me, this is going to sound HORRIBLE
From the first one it says - look its not that uncommon
Second, only 1% men get prosecuted so its like you will almost always get away with it
Third, almost half of your victims will never talk or report the crime
Fourth, every two minutes a rape is occuring somewhere maybe you should be raping someone too. Reminds me of the "Call us now!" phrase telemarketers use.
fifth, the most common way to rape is date rape or acquaintance rape.
What do these people want? And why are they advocating FOR such a vile crime? Is this even legal? Cause I don't see any morals supporting it. I mean come on feminists, are you trying to decrease the rapes or increase them?
March 2nd, 2008 at 4:59 pm
(I am reposting since i made so many typos in my previous post)
I am also currently in the university system, and I see displays like that quite often. One billboard depicting "male privilege" showed a picture of a man with a perfectly erect umbrella revealing a privileged man keeping the rain off his head. The poor female, on the other hand, had a broken umbrella and the rain came down on her. Poor gal! Too bad it isnt true, and it should have shown the male having hail come crashing down on his head!
In fact, I have even tried complaining about these kinds of things to the uni gate-keepers before.......only to no-avail. In fact, one of the people I complained to told me that doing about it won't do any good because nobody would believe me anyway that males face discrimination in society.
It is interesting who is responsble for these displays. In my situation, it was a hard-core feminist think-tank that actually went above campus policy and did not author the display with their name.............hmmmm. These same people came out of the woodwork and militantly opposed the ND shared parenting initiative as well.
Hey alex.........hopefully you won't let that crap get you down. I know exactly what it is like to see a display like that!! It made me feel sick inside.
Keep up the good work alex.
MXY
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:14 pm
"I am also currently in the university system, and I see displays like that quite often. One showed a picture of a man with a perfectly erect umbrella depicting a privleged man keeping the rain off his head. The poor female had a broken umbrella and the rain came down on her. Poor gal! Too bad it isnt true, and it should have shown the male having hail coming down on his head!"
This is particularly ridiculous, given that in most social situations it would be the woman who would be given priority if there was a shortage of umbrellas. It reminds me of the situation in many parts of Europe earlier in the 20th century, where people would hurl bedpans out the window into the sewer. It was customary for men to walk on the outer side of the street, so that in an unfortunate event they would get splashed rather than the woman. Ah sweet privilege.
Jay R, it is quite sad that your sons have been so conditioned by feminist propaganda that they can't see what is wrong with being treated as potential rapists. I was kind of like that for a while, until I began to wise up.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:17 pm
I see this stuff all of the time at Florida State University as well. The 1 in 4 stat is everywhere including official campus newspapers. I also recall a recent Domestic violence display put up on campus by some of the budding feminazi's in the woman's studies department.
It was quick to list fake states that 1 in 4 women are beaten by men, men rape xx women every minute, there are more animal shelters then womans shelters in the United states. The word "men" was in bold and underlined. The day before they were soliciting people (both men and women) to have them sign the banner to show that they're against domestic violence. As if anyone is actually for domestic violence. The next day of course they promptly slandered the very men who where sympathic to their cause.
The problem is that there is an unofficial climate of self censorship and avoidance to saying anything that is non-pc by those who study and work here. The obvious fact is that it would be easy for a professor to mark someone's grade down and claim it happened "accidentally" if they were caught. People who do actually give a shit are too concerned with getting though school and maintaining a high enough GPA to either get into grad school or get into a decent job with. And those who don't care obviously are more interested in partying it up on mommy and daddy's money.
That leaves no one to challenge the official ideology but religious zealots, who the school can't unofficially punish, who occasionally come on campus to loudly and publicly insult anyone who happens to be walking by calling them: harlots, homosexuals, murderers, etc. Picture the Fred Phelps minus the obscenity. Not exactly good PR for anyone who wants to challenge the feminist extremist agenda.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:19 pm
Pankaj,
very good points. If you exaggerate how common crimes like rape really are, then to some extent you normalise the practice. I remember reading an article by a male feminist called 'Rape is Normal'. WTF?
The feminists wouldn't care if their propaganda actually encouraged assault. More funding for them I guess. These guys thrive on conflict and drama.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:22 pm
Pankaj asks, what do these people want?
I, too, am puzzled by the angry reaction of radical gender feminists every time someone demonstrates that there is NOT a rape epidemic on campus (and by the way, the recent article by Heather MacDonald says that the only people not buying these phony stats on campus are -- the students, male and female). It's the same reaction they had when it turned out that Crystal Gail Mangum was NOT raped by three young lacrosse players. I personally think it's great news there is not a rape crisis on campus, with all that testosterone waiting to be unleashed, and I say that not in any way to excuse bad male behavior. Why can't they rejoice? Because they want to feel like victims and many have convinced themselves these lies are true.
This is another of those issues where the general public will support us. The reason I hate their lies is that it is saying there is something horribly wrong with my gender-- (and guys have enough real problems -- e.g., incredible suicide rates, shorter life expectancy, prostate cancer that's about as deadly as breast cancer but hardly anybody cares about, etc. -- without false statistics that want to paint an incredible percentage of us as rapists. Instead of stomping their feet and insisting that there is a rape crisis when the evidence flat-out doesn't support it, their time would be better spent addressing far more pressing problems that affect many more young women -- and young men.
But, you see, rape is symbol of this vague oppression they feel -- the "patriarchy's" ultimate weapon, they think. Sadly, it is disparagement of an entire gender.
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:31 pm
How wonderful that a fresh generation of false-data-indoctrinated false accusers is being prepped by U.S. colleges.
I wonder how long it will be before America sets up rape compensation courts? And since everyone knows that rape is so common, a false rape charge could then evolve to be a routine way to achieve a "civil" settlement from a man who (1) refuses to ever marry -- for very good reasons, and (2) refuses to ever have children -- for equally good reasons.
Yes, our legal system does need to think ahead! And with men not willing to marry, and wearing triple condoms when they do dare go near a woman, the family court gravy train could soon run out of economic steam.
Enter the "Rape Court" --- or let's call it "Intimate Assault Compensation Court" to help suggest and promote the date rape idea a bit further. And it would be similarly promoted as a venue for women who don't wish to press criminal charges, but do seek to be compensated, etc. This way the lawyers can have a field day in fees (including fees paid by wealthy parents for their sons), the women can collect the same kind of megabucks they get with a paternity or divorce action, AND, the women aren't stuck having to bear or otherwise fake showing interest in actually caring for a child. But they can still fully access a male's lifetime earnings, and maybe even those of his parents too!
It's PERFECT!
March 2nd, 2008 at 5:40 pm
Has anybody ever done a study with any kind of credibility about why women have rape fantasies?
And why men in general have never attempted or even considered raping a woman?
What is the POLITICAL UTILITY of demonizing men with this rape hysteria?
HMMMMMM?
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:14 pm
"Has anybody ever done a study with any kind of credibility about why women have rape fantasies?"-Roy
I don't believe this article says much about "rape fantasy", but it is about women's fantasies during sexual intercourse. It suggests that "submission" is one of the most common female sexual fantasies:
Hariton & Singer. 1974. Women's fantasies during sexual intercourse: Normative and theoretical implications. Journal of consulting and clinical psychology, 42(3), 313-322.
MXY
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:18 pm
Current rape advocacy has it's origins in the feminist activism of the late seventies and early eighties. It was virulently anti male and, in my mind, the first real manifestation of the radicals flexing their muscles. One of the first times I ever had any misgivings about feminists was during rape protests in which ninety year old veterans in wheel chairs were being physically threatened during ANZAC day marches.
In many feminist minds rape is more about an having opportunity to demonize men than anything to do with concern for real victims. The more actual rapes that occur the better for them. They only see the rapist. They don't really see the victims. Notice how rape is normalised by the inclusion of almost anything even including inadvertant contact or, sometimes, nothing more than a man looking at them. Thus any woman can be a victim and every man is a rapist.
The radicals have become the mainstream and they will cling tenaciously to what they see as the basis of their influence. The current crossover with Feministing provides a demonstration of the absurd lengths some feminists will go to as does the activism present in virtually all our schools.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:20 pm
The "facts" are in!
So thanks a stat provided on feministing comment by one of THEM (see XX for more) I've calculated the "actual" percentage of women in college who are raped (again, based upon these numbers). Let me know if I am reading this wrong, but we seem to now have a bit of ammunition that is even based upon a source THEY think is credible.
Ok, as noted in the feministing-comment above, according to a study conducted by the Department of Justice and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 1/6 of the 8000 female members of the population were raped (vaginal, oral, and anal) over their lifetimes. Further, they provide a breakdown by age where 22.2% of the victims were between 18 and 24 at the time of the assault. Now we can do a little math:
1/6 = 16.7% of the female population is raped (no question, if correct, a terrible percentage). BUT, the subject here is the number who are raped IN COLLEGE, correct? Well let's assume 100% of the 18-24 cohort were in college at the time. This is a bad assumption, but given the resolution of the stats, its the best we can do. Therefore, the actual percentage of women who are raped IN COLLEGE are:
16.7% * 22.2% = 3.7% (NOT 25%)
Even if we expand it to include everyone under 25 (ie: 85% of the victims), you still don't approach the 25%:
16.7% * 85% = 14.2% (NOT 25%)
Now it is debatable whether 3.7% is a "crisis" compared with everything else that happens..How many men are stabbed/maimed during the same timeframe for instance, but let's not muddy the waters. But, it certainly is VERY different from the 25% they seem to want to maintain.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:21 pm
Sorry, the XX should be
http://feministing.com/archives/008670.html#comment-136802
And the state on the DOJ are broken down on the following site:
http://66.216.123.69/RTC/Facts+and+Quotes/Statistics
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:25 pm
(for some reason Glenn's moderation filter caught my original comment (don't know why when I forgot the links!) so I'm sure it will come through soon)...
Basically, as you will see when it comes through, the gist is - according to their sources - the number of percentage of college-aged women who are raped is 16.7% * 22.2% = 3.7% (NOT 25%).
I won't rehash the analysis - you'll see when GS gets to it.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:27 pm
What would the University do if you set a table right next to it with an alternate display? A backboard with the title "True Rape Statistics". Information on the real numbers and where the fake ones came from, information on the Duke Hoax and other tasty stuff. What would they do?
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:28 pm
Hysteria = Power unfortunately in this country. To many legislators, politicians and judges are either to ignorant, to lazy, or to apathetic to ask simple questions to disprove these outrageous statistics.
This should be a hate crime. It would be if it were perpetuated against anyone but a man.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:31 pm
On a scale of 1 to 10, how much did ya'll miss me?
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:35 pm
Georgia Girl.....If you are on topic about a six, off topic about a zero. I get the feeling you are going to come in out of left field with this one.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:38 pm
I'll go sharpen my fangs and bring back some saved articles articles for you ..... since you know I don't agree :(
Don't worry, I'll condense them
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:40 pm
Seems to me, if they supply the space for this type of “rape hysteria agitation propaganda” then they have to allow a place for the actual facts to be posted. (Preferably right next to the lies)
If they won’t provide a space for the truth, that’s probably grounds for a lawsuit. A strike could also be organized by the students in protest. Don’t college kids do things like that anymore?
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:45 pm
One (potentially small) note: I inadvertently mixed stats from two different studies. I didn't realize from the "Facts & Quotes" site that they weren't talking about the same study for both sets of numbers.
That being said, IF the 8000 was a truly representative sample of the population as a whole AND IF the 22.2% came from a similarly designed questionnaire, THEN the percentages I calculated should still be pretty close to correct. Presumably, the study would have provided a percentage of the overall population, but they did not provide it on the facts & quotes site. Weird. It would be worth digging up the original studies to take a look!
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:45 pm
Lance, great analysis. THAT'S the sort of thing we need to do to debunk their nonsense.
Amazing that radical feminists can't understand why so many men are unhappy with their lies -- that one in four stat says that something is horribly wrong with our entire gender, and by extension, US. As guys, we knew instinctively that number was way off, and I am glad we can prove it. Now let's get the message out.
Does this mean we are defending rape? Anyone who would suggest that is a complete idiot and a misadrist of the first order.
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
Thanks Tim, I'll take a look at the original literature and see what I can see. Even if that 1/6 was completely WHILE IN COLLEGE, we still wouldn't be talking 1/4 (or even the 1/5 they sometimes also talk about)!
March 2nd, 2008 at 6:48 pm
I miss my southern girlfriend.
She was from Mississippi.
She never"condensed" any of our encounters.
I'm still recovering...
It was sometimes exhausting, but always an enlightening experience.
I guess gals from Georgia are more efficient?
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:08 pm
Jason: the 42% of rapes that are not reported by the woman, well, the rapists obviously report it. :)
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:10 pm
Hey, this got posted!
The weird thing is, that poster is just kind of lying on the floor in the middle of some hall somewhere. And I can't tell exactly who's responsible for it. Those three little stars at the top all mention "Take Back The Night" and FMLA. But those purple papers at the sides (which list UN statistics on the apparent global epidemics of rape AND domestic violence. Two for one) say Amnesty International USA on them.
Even then, I don't know who I'm supposed to register a complaint with at my school.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:30 pm
Georgia Girl: "since you know I don't agree"
Now let's make sure of what we are agreeing/disagreeing about. We all agree that (a) rape happens and (b) rape is bad. No need to be changing to subject via strawman arguments or name calling (we aren't "rape apologists" or the like). We just want to make sure evidence takes precedence over feelings here.
If we stick with this framework, I'll be happy to read/critique any articles you post, and your joining this conversation is a 10.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:51 pm
"42% of college women who are raped do not tell anyone about the assault"
That's roughly the percentage that lie about such assaults. According to Human Rights Watch several years ago, less than 1/3 of U.S. rapes even had female victims because of the prevalence of prison rape.
March 2nd, 2008 at 7:53 pm
Tim Says:
"that one in four stat says that something is horribly wrong with our entire gender"
The problem with reaching such a conclusion is that is inaccurately assumes that if 25% of women are being raped... it is being done by 25% of men.
The two however aren't logically connected in such a fashion because it assumes a 1 to 1 correspondence between perpetrator and victim... as if each rapist attacks one person and then is finished because they've "done their part".
The more rational conclusion to draw is that a substantially smaller percentage are assaulting multiple people.
The reason this is more rational is because it makes little sense that a sociopath would attack one person and then suddenly reform their ways.
The sad purpose of the 1 in 4 statistic is specifically to draw people into the psychologically compelling trap that a 1 to 1 correspondence does exist... therefore demonizing an entire gender for the actions of a few real criminals.
In any other context this sort of thing would be instantly recognized for what it was... prejudiced... because an entire group is being stereotyped negatively because of the nefarious deeds of a small percentage who resemble them in some way.
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:03 pm
Kelly M. Bray says: What would the University do if you set a table right next to it with an alternate display?
No! Wrong is wrong.
Allowing gender hate mongering to be displayed is just plain wrong. Rather than try to refute totally fabricated stats, why not just add to the display with race and religion hate mongering? If civil behavior has been suspended, let’s suspend it for everyone, not just the gender hate mongerers.
Hate mongering is either in or it’s out, period. Pick one.
DanH
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:07 pm
The issue of being a "rape apologist" is a "poisoning the well" tactic of gender-feminists. The psychological perspective on rape is interesting, because as a science it neither condones nor condems rape..............but rather attempts to understand it from a motivational/behavioral/cognitive paradigm. True science is devoid of any value judgements..........whether positive or negative. Psychology (as a value-free science) is interested in why most people don't rape and and also why some people do rape (male or female).
Interesting psychological questions include: How should rape be operationalized? How should herjury be operationalized? What is the distinction between date rape and forced rape? is rape a manifestation of power? Is rape a manifestation of "powerlessness?" What is the construct of "power" and how should it be operationalized? What are the socio-economic correlates of rape and/or herjury? How can rape be reduced? Were rapists raped or molested themselves? If so, what is the predictive validity of such correlates? Do rapists express hate at the opposite gender as a class? What is "hate", and how can it be operationalized? Is there variability in personality between rapists (phenomenology)? Is the motivation for herjury similar to the motivation for rape itself? Why do most people NOT rape? How can understanding the absence of target behavior in one demographic help explain the existence of said behavior in another target population (how can understanding why most people don't rape help explain why some people do)? What economic gains are contingent on personality as opposed to situational context vis-a-vis rapists or non-rapists? Does prison reduce the recidivism rate of rape or herjury? Does gender-feminism create a milieu of enhanced social amalgesia in some famales via virtue of edifying the faculties with false sensations of victimhood? etc etc.
I think more psychologists should study issues like rape and pedophilia because it is only by determining an antecedant that the inhibition of consequence can occur.............which can lead to the actual prevention of rape. This is a fascinating area of psychology. Again, from a scientific vantage point, psychology neither condemns nor condones.........just attempts to understand. This is not the same as being a rape-apologist.
But like others have been saying, it is unclear whether feminists even want to prevent rape. Hating men and playing the victim seem far more fun.
But all in all I have a psychological bias, since that is my area of study!
MXY
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:12 pm
alex said:
"Hey, this got posted!"
Hey you shouldnt act so surprised! It was a great find.
What bugs me is that so many males and females alike let posters like that go without even demanding a reference list. Surly SOMEONE must want to see where these numbers came from!
MXY
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:23 pm
And we have a winner!
roy says: Sexual harassment and anti-discrimination laws to which universities are subject include provisions against creating a "hostile and intimidating environment … for either gender.” I think it would be worthwhile to explore a class action suit by young men against the institutionalized campus hostility towards males and the administrative neglect of fiduciary responsibility to provide a safe and non-discriminatory environment.
The stats are pure gender hatred fabrications. This display is without question sexual harassment and a blatant civil rights violation. If the university cannot show an aggressive stand against such gender hate mongering, they will be writing some very big checks and they will continue writing big checks until it sinks in this is most definitely sexual harassment.
All it will take is an attorney with the appropriate level of brass to step up and declare “enough is enough.” Once a few colleges fall, the remainder should have second thoughts about just shrugging their shoulders when this rancid act occurs.
DanH
March 2nd, 2008 at 8:30 pm
Jason, I agree that this is a blatant form of prejudice. I also do not mean to suggest an exact one-to-one "rapist" correlation to their one-in-four "victims." But whatever their number, it is clear to me that the radical feminists are suggesting that an incredible percentage of young men are rapists. They do not attribute most rapes to serial rapists; they do not talk of rapists as sociopaths, but simply as regular guys, like you and me, exercising their male "privilege," which supposedly includes raping women. It is for this reason they believe all young men on campus need to be indoctrinated to their legally incorrect definitions of rape.
The terribly offensive aspect of their lie is that it paints the entire male gender as comprised of an incredible percentage of rapists. This suggests nothing less than that our gender is terribly flawed, and, frankly, evil. We all know that is ludicrous and insulting, and we have the scholarship to back us up.
DanH, I agree with you. This sort of lie should not be tolerated, any more than a sign saying "25 percent of blacks . . . ." or "only one percent of blacks . . . ." would be tolerated. You wouldn't challenge such blatant prejudice about blacks with an alternate sign setting forth the facts. You would challenge it by demanding the sign be removed and the person(s) who put it up be sanctioned. The same should be true here.
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:27 pm
As you guys know, I'm a big proponent of fighting fire with fire in the courts. What would it take (other then a willing lawyer) to build such a case against a college/university?
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:40 pm
anonymous pamphleteer
"a false rape charge could then evolve to be a routine way to achieve a "civil" settlement from a man who (1) refuses to ever marry -- for very good reasons, and (2) refuses to ever have children -- for equally good reasons.
Yes, our legal system does need to think ahead! And with men not willing to marry, and wearing triple condoms when they do dare go near a woman, the family court gravy train could soon run out of economic steam."
MCA.
One way or the other, this "rape hysteria" will run it's course.
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:43 pm
Lance and all who read hear.. The way to fight fire with fire is to first educate others...tell you're friends about glenn sacks!!
Send them a linc to the blog.
Just do it!!
March 2nd, 2008 at 9:52 pm
Lance, this is just off the top of my head. I suspect you'd be looking at a harrassment claim where you'd need to establsh that the college sanctions the dissemination of false and demeaning "information" suggesting males are inferior (e.g., signs and other literature suggesting an inordinate percentage of young men are "rapists") and that this creates a hostile study environment for young men. Similar actions by females, in different contexts, have prevailed, and under law it is supposed to work both ways. The drawback you'd have is that you'd need to establish that the toxic environment interferes with young men's ability to study. Frankly, that's going to be difficult to establish because the majority of men in our society, yound and old, are so accustomed to being branded the oppressor, these sorts of signs likely wouldn't be offensive to most young men.
Did you catch the irony? How sick is that? Because the hostility is so wide-spread and so ingrained in our society's psyche, it may be difficult to establish.
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:03 pm
Using their own stats here is how one can really interpret this message:
42% of their stats are over-inflated for illustrative purposes
99% of the stats are unverified
Therefore,
Less than 0.1% of women who graduate are raped (.25*.01*.58) = .001
Worldwide 4 rapes occur every day (1rape/2min*60min/hr*24hr/day*.01*.58) = 4 rapes/day
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:38 pm
It should be a crime not to report a rape and all rape reports must require a lie detector test. Especially at George Washington University where the math is suspect.
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Lance,
Somewhere along the east coast, a mixed-up gal published in the school newspaper a list of all men on campus and declared all of them rapists because they were men.
An attorney got ahold of it and a whole lot of very big checks were written on behalf of all men so slandered.
Google the heck out of all angles you can think of to get hits to track down the attorney. He or she has already laid a lot of the groundwork for a suit.
Good Luck,
DanH
March 2nd, 2008 at 10:54 pm
DanH, what you describe is a libel suit -- that's different than what Lance is referencing. Lance is not describing a situation where a woman lied about particular men being rapists. Libel is written defamation, and it is available to any person if a lie is published about them that lowers their standing in the community. Defamation actions, sadly, are not available to entire classes -- or genders. For this, you are looking at a harrassment claim, as described in my comment above.
March 2nd, 2008 at 11:15 pm
P.S. Not to discourage Lance, and there may be other attorneys out there with creative ways to fashion a law suit, but I think the way to go is to seek a change in policy at the college by exerting internal pressure, first on the University's president, and then on the college's board of trustees/directors. You might be able to fashion a discrimination action but hold it in the background, a threat that hopefully you won't have to use. Target the Catholic universities where this crap is going on first. They typically have more conservative administrators and boards. Mount a petition drive and you might get some local media coverage, which always gets the Board's attention. If you demonstrate a manifest injustice -- a lie that is painting half the student body as criminals or potential criminals -- you may get some of this rolled back.
March 2nd, 2008 at 11:18 pm
"Easilly impressionable men who are exposed to this type of misleading agit-prop become the "mis-placed protectors" who not unlike modern day Don quiote's ...seek to super protect women at the expense of mens basic civil rigths.."
Yes, and these men are called "newspaper reporters." Check out this video of a Chicago Tribune editor chastizing the paper's new owner, Sam Zell, about how he spoke to a female reporter and it "deeply offended" her.
It's didn't just OFFEND her, mind you. It DEEPLY offended her. Please. Listen to this guy's ridiculously paternalistic tone -- you'd think this was 1908, not 2008. I'm sure it earned him lots of claps on the back by the female employees who will then turn around and sue him for harrassment on a dime.
http://www.chicagotribune.com/business/columnists/chi-wed_phil27feb27,0,5606561.column
March 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 am
A number of posters here have correctly pointed out the fact that just because 1 in 4 women are raped (or whatever the real statistic is) does not mean that 1 in 4 men (or whatever the real statistic is) are rapists.
However, another thing that must be pointed out is that just because there were x rapes reported over a given amount of time does not necessarily mean that there were x rape victims. It is quite possible that some of the rape victims were raped multiple times.
For example, if a woman at a 4 year college was raped as a freshmen and then raped again as a junior, that would count as 2 rapes.
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:57 am
More campus shenanigans?
This just came to my attention from California. I can't work out if it's serious or merely satire.
V-Day Festival, Monologues To Educate Campus
Get this!...
This is an aspiring actor who feels violated by having her photo taken.
In my sporting days there would have been thousands of photos taken of me and very few of them could be described as consensual.
Wow...just WOW.
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:34 am
You know what is really the most offensive thing about that campus display?
It is not aesthetically well-designed.
Are there no women's studies majors with a minor in graphic design?
It looks like a seventh-grade science fair poster.
If feminists seek to offend me, please package the message with some artistic finesse.
That display simply sucks.
March 3rd, 2008 at 9:29 am
Now, does anybody have any data on what percentage of men are financially and emotionally raped, and then sold into slavery by America's family courts?
Let's see...
Over 50% of all marriages end in divorce. Then we have the paternity actions to add to that figure, right?
Hmmm...
Could it be that 60% or more of all U.S. adult males will wind up being dragged into America's courts? (The 50% could include multiply married individuals, etc., but one guesses that just adding 10% more is too little to pick up paternity actions, so let's just use 60% as a conservative figure.)
Now, what percentage of these men would choose
1. being physically raped against their will (but with no child against their will as a possible consequence as any women who is actually raped can certainly be assured that outcome)
vs.
2. being financially and emotionally raped (loss of fair access to their kids) and enslaved by America's family courts?
And what is American government doing to prevent this raping of men?
Nothing. It is encouraging and profiting from it.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:31 am
# J.R. Phelps Says:
(original at March 3rd, 2008 at 12:15 am)
NOTICE!: Opinionated edit!
Fixed it for ya'
Sorry, there's no graphic {strike}, nor "translation:" function apparently favored
at other opinion sites. (rightly so) CaptDMO claims sole intellectual responsibility for this comment, with
appropriate credit due J.R. Phelps for the (linked) original.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:33 am
Sorry, I can't go back and clean it up.
Hope the intent is not lost.
March 3rd, 2008 at 12:10 pm
http://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf
Is a report from the National Institute of Justice and the Bureau of Justice statistics. A few nuggets from the conclusion.
"Of course, many other methodological issues in addition to the use of behaviorally specific screen questions and survey context will have to be addressed in the quest to design surveys capable of achieving more accurate estimates of rape and other forms of sexual victimization."
"In short, systematic, rigorous experimental research into the factors that affect victim responses and, in turn, victimization estimates—especially in the sensitive area of rape and sexual assault—remains in its beginning stages."
And the two that leave me in a bit of a quandry:
"Although exceptions exist, most sexual victimizations occur when college women are alone with a man they know, at night, and in the privacy of a residence."
"Several factors appeared to increase various types of victimization: living on campus, being unmarried, getting drunk frequently, and experiencing prior sexual victimization."
Is the government saying that there are women who habitually put themselves in bad situations?
March 3rd, 2008 at 1:51 pm
Lewis, a word about that flawed DOJ study:
First, there is zero reference to methodology, of any kind. Whatsoever.
Second: “The victimization rate was 27.7 rapes per 1,000 female students.” That sure looks like one-in-thirty-six to me. And then the fun begins: they extrapolate, they project, they multiply. All without ANY data to back it up. And they arrive at 4.9% per year. Which sure looks like one-in-twenty to me. And then the fun continues: they multiply that risk for each year of the four years in college — which is absurd, because the risk is the risk. (You don’t run a higher risk of being raped in year two because you didn’t get raped in year one.) And they decided that the number would be between one-in-five and one-in-four, even though the actually number, multiplied times four, would still be less than one-in-four.
Now listen to this next point: either way, the stat is nonsense, because their conclusion presumes that a repetition of the same odds, over and over again, eventually makes it happen. By that argument, any woman who goes to college and lives to be 54 will have a 100% chance of being raped.
Finally, even if the one-in-thirty-six were true, let's use as a real life example, my school, University of Pittsburgh -- a big urban school with approximately 18,000 female students. According to the DOJ stats, Pitt should have had 500 sexual assaults in 2006. Do you know how many complaints of sexual assault were lodged with campus police for all of 2006? This is according to Pitt's own records which they publish on line: ONE. That's right, one, and we have no idea if it was a false accusation (which, according to Prof. K. C. Johnson's book, "Until Proven Innocent," false accusations account for up to half of all rape complaints). So, we have more than 99% underreporting? Does that strike ANYONE as plausible, aside from radical feminist nutcases? Oh, I forgot -- rape is the most underreported of all crimes. We know it's underreported because no one is reporting all these campus rapes that must be occurring. Which proves, of course, that rape is rampant on campus.
In any other context, there is a word for the sort of "analysis" that study engages in: lie.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:08 pm
Tim,
"Now listen to this next point: either way, the stat is nonsense, because their conclusion presumes that a repetition of the same odds, over and over again, eventually makes it happen."
That is a very astute observation... it is the same fallacy that leads some people to believe that if they roll a dice six times they are guaranteed to get a 6.
The problem of course is that people who think this way have a very poor understanding of probability.
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:23 pm
How can they allow something like this with highly questionable (putting it kindly) numbers and method of data gathering be displayed?
I wonder if I was to post my opinions (these are not my opinions they are just to implore a point and stand on equal emotional ground) that the Jewish community to gain empathy exaggerated the number of deaths of their people in WWII
The 4-6 million number cannot be proven in fact there are documents and photographs to prove otherwise.
There are documented pictures and files of 5,000 life terminations
Those that were terminated were so through euthanasia. Medical records and photographs clearly demonstrate that these people were very ill and risked exposing others encamped so through mercy killing two grander things came from it; ending the patients suffering and preventing many others from becoming ill
Tattoos; these were to keep accurate records, which confirm the 5,000 number. Also the Germans learned this technique from the Americans and their "dog tags.” Knowing that some people do not understand that things that they do not like are done for their own good and to avoid wasting anyone’s time and treatment these "dog tag" numbers were permanently inked onto their arms so that uninformed dissidents could not slow the care of these people by in some manor discarding physical tags.
etc. etc.
I could go on all day the interesting point here is that I cited “proof” for my “facts” and the hate statistics poster did not hmmm
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:31 pm
I forgot to add
How long do you think that would stay up and what are the odds of disciplinary action?
And of course my biggest reason for Picking the Jewish community (Sorry guys no offence meant) Is that the make up about 1% of the population and men make up 50% but it is ok to offend that many but not that few
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 2:51 pm
Glenn,
I notice your disclaimer
I certainly hope that it has nothing to do with my encounter with feministing the other day . . . I am only curious because of the timing
If it is I will bow out of this site but only after a few more questions
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:03 pm
Bernie Misiura Says "Glenn, I notice your disclaimer I certainly hope that it has nothing to do with my encounter with feministing the other day."
No, nothing to do with you--I've been meaning to do this for a while but my web guy and I hadn't gotten around to it.--GS
March 3rd, 2008 at 3:37 pm
Thanks bud . . . I figured that would be your response but if I have any question I will always ask to head things off at the pass if you will.
The last thing I wish to do is bring you, this site, or the cause any trouble, but being a human being I know that some times my emotions over ride my intellect. I do to the best of my ability to try to keep that in check when elsewhere and when people can try to assume that I am solely representing you, this site, or the cause.
Please feel free to contact me at anytime that you feel anything I say of do is way out of line, I would prefer that these things do not fester and be taken care of before that point
Thanks for your reply
Keep up the good work
Bernie
March 3rd, 2008 at 5:48 pm
One more thought in addition to my post above:
I am assuming that the study Lewis references is based on some survey or other.
Did they include males in their survey? They need to include males in their survey populations because otherwise the survey would be premised on the notion that when it comes to the subject of rape, one gender is incapable of lying while the other is comprised of pathological liars. (Of course the people behind this crap actually believe that.)
I also wonder how the researchers are defining "rape." That seems to be one of the principal problems in the entire campus rape landscape. "Rape" ought to be defined as intercourse for which the woman did not objectively manifest her consent, in words or by her conduct. I am assuming the numbers are obtained from some survey. If so, the persons questioned would need to be given an accurate definition of rape and also they should be told this: consent may be manifested by silence, and the subjective but not disclosed wishes of the woman play no role in determining whether consent was obtained.
Finally, did they include some allowance, at least 9 percent, for false claims? I say nine, although objective analysis shows the number is closer to 50%.
March 3rd, 2008 at 6:25 pm
Tim Murray said in part...
"Rape" ought to be defined as intercourse for which the woman did not objectively manifest her consent, in words or by her conduct.
Be careful. You are being rather gender specific here. Does male consent matter at all? Much of the so called rape as defined in these stats stems from actions just as easily committed by a female as a male.
Some stuff I posted yesterday in a similar discussion...
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Gwallan, there are few reported cases of such misconduct constituting rape, but if a woman took advantage of a wholly insensible man in the manner you describe, it would be a form of sexual assault. (And statutory rape is another matter -- see below.)
Your comment is legitimate and it's a point well taken, but it is statistically a blip on the "rape" landscape. Let us not allow ourselves to be sidetracked. The vast majority of cases involve males capable of consenting to an erection and intercourse. Here is the point: If these surveys properly define rape in accordance with long-settled law, and if they questioned both women AND men, and if they made proper allowance for false rape claims, we would have a much more accurate number. Maybe one percent?
OK, you mentioned the statutory rape victim being liable for child support -- and this is a detour but we want this to be completely accurate. The following is based on information from a U.S. law review article by a law professor, not some biased commentator with an ax to grind. If your son is statutorily raped by a woman, he will be liable for child support if the rapist decides to have the baby -- which means, you will have to pay for your son's child. In the case of County of San Luis Obispo v. Nathaniel J., 57 Cal. Rptr. 2d 843 (Ct. App. 1996), a thirty-four-year-old woman had sex with a fifteen-year-old boy and became pregnant. The woman was convicted of unlawful sexual intercourse with a minor -- commonly called statutory rape. She decided to have the child, and after she gave birth to her baby daughter, she received Aid for Families with Dependent Children -- and the county sought reimbursement for the AFDC payments from the father, the 15-year-old boy. The court held that the boy, a statutory rape victim, was financially liable for the child that resulted from his victimization. This case is not alone: "Two state supreme courts and several state appellate courts have ruled that male statutory rape victims can be financially liable for supporting a child resulting from their criminal victimization." R. Jones, ARTICLE: INEQUALITY FROM GENDER-NEUTRAL LAWS: WHY MUST MALE VICTIMS OF STATUTORY RAPE PAY CHILD SUPPORT FOR CHILDREN RESULTING FROM THEIR VICTIMIZATION? 36 Ga. L. Rev. 411 (2002). There are no reported cases where female victims of statutory rape have been held to a similar support obligation.
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Bernie M. -- "...risked exposing others ENCAMPED?"
ENCAMPED? WTF?
I am going to lose a lot of sleep trying to comprehend how an individual could describe people conscripted and enslaved and subjected to genocide and victims of a documented holocaust as being merely "ENCAMPED."
It is beyond my imagination...
This is going to cost me a lot of sleep to figure it out.
Bernie -- are you a rational human being?
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:15 pm
@Tim...
You miss my point. Maybe I didn't put it well enough.
Much of what feminists claim to be rape is an act men can be victims of as easily as women. I'm thinking of the alcohol related laws many jurisdictions have introduced. I was also trying to point out that women may have the additional motivation of pregnancy.
In my country the circumstance I outlined would be defined as rape under existing law. Gender is irrelevant.
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:51 pm
Did not miss your poiint. I said your point is well taken. I said, it is very, very rare in the U.S. where a male is rendered wholly insensible (the usual standard to invalidate consent in the context of rape) and is still able to sustain an erection and penetrate. Only in that circumstance (in most jurisdiictions here in the US) could we say a male was sexually assaulted by a female, even though he was the one who penetrated. If the two are merely drunk and have sex, generally consent is NOT invalidated by either one -- she (or he) can consent and it is not rape (the feminists would disagree but they don't care what the law says). The situation where a male is rendered wholly insensible and still able to have sex is a blip on the real or imagined rape landscape and I think it is a mistake to try to make more out of it than there is. My point is we don't need to resort to that to show how ludicrous is the argument that one in four women are raped.
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:51 pm
All of this amazingly insightful discussion and keep coming back to one very simple question (and forgive me if it's already been mentioned):
If the 25% figure were even remotely true, what young woman would ever attend college?
Seriously. Is a college education of such importance that you would take such a substantial risk of being raped? Repeatedly? What family would send their young daughter off to school with such high risks? When you consider that rape is often accompanied by serious violence, even death - why? Why would you go to college at all?
March 3rd, 2008 at 8:55 pm
Mister-M -- that's the million dollar question -- who in their right mind would send a daughter to college if there were a one in four chance she'd be raped? (Of course the feminists would tell you that she's safer in college than around her father and brothers.)
Seriously, you are correct. The reason women aren't staying away from college, the reason, in fact, they are going to college more than ever, is because everyone knows that college campuses are among the safest places in America. For women.
And what, pray tell, does this LIE say about our gender? It says there is something terribly wrong with us, that we are predisposed to evil. That is what is most offensive about their lie.
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:40 pm
roy Says:
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:58 pm
Bernie M. -- "...risked exposing others ENCAMPED?"
ENCAMPED? WTF?
I am going to lose a lot of sleep trying to comprehend how an individual could describe people conscripted and enslaved and subjected to genocide and victims of a documented holocaust as being merely "ENCAMPED."
It is beyond my imagination...
This is going to cost me a lot of sleep to figure it out.
Bernie -- are you a rational human being?
= = =
roy - are you a rational human being? You and I have been on here long enough for you to realize that I do not think that way and if I exaggerate it is to show how absurd the other point is (which I stated when I posted my post in which you question my rationality)
Go back read it again . . . you missed the point entirely
It is a comparison between the Hate Statistics (as they are severely distorted). What I posted which is equally distorted (as I stated "(these are not my opinions they are just to implore a point and stand on equal emotional ground.)" In other words it is easy to make outrageous statements but ironically the Hate Statistics do not cite any so called "facts" and mine does which adds credibility to my argument. The very least they could do is to add where they got their information from so it could be checked out. Again ironically in my statement about the medical documents, pictures, and the fact that they were ill cannot be disputed. I cannot believe that I have to spell this out but I did not state how they got sick.
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 10:52 pm
From USDOJ
in 2005 rape in people 12 and over was 0.005% includes both attempted and completed rapes, forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means penetration by the offender(s). Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Bernie, I don't doubt your good intentions. Sometimes we all read comments too quickly and it;s easy to reach the wrong conclusion about what a person intended.
As for the hate statistics,. this is not in defense of people who assert that one-in-four stat, but -- I think a lot of folks parrot it without really thinking about it. When it's repeated by non-raidcal feminists, it is just something that is said to caution, to raise awareness about what might happen. Few people really think about the absurdity of it, or stop to consider how they are painting the entire male gender as rapists-in-waiting. Stats like that take on a life of their own, and sadly, for many years men did next to nothing to correct it. (Maybe because few people really pay attention to it.)
But just like that expression about women over 40 having a better chance of being struck by lightning than of getting married (which is wrong), it's just something that's said over and over, and people assume it's true because it's so well known.
Maybe we're taking the wrong approach to all this. Maybe we should be saying, hey, if they're nutty enough to think we're rapists, that's their problem. Go ahead and fear us if you want. You're not worth the effort to try to change your mind.
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:37 pm
Crunch their numbers
Using the displayed chart 25% are raped or there has been an attempt on them
Assuming that the justice system does make some mistakes but that number is typically low we can accept that the 1% prosecuted is a fair representation of the people who have actually raped based on the evidence that proves rape and dismisses those who have made false accusations and any other fallacies. This brings the total of real rapes to
0.25% of the campus population
42% do not report the assault
This brings the number of actual rapes (by their own numbers) to 0.35855%
On a campus of 10,000 with a 50/50 ratio the number of female rapes would be 17.9275
And 15.238375 that knew their attackers, some that may have been actually raped, some that the victim changed their mind about after for what ever the reason (these numbers become confusing when the attacker is known because most of the time the "attacker" states that they had consent and the "victim" states that they did not or changed their mind during (and the amount of time it takes the attacker to stop is the crux of whether a rape has occurred or not) or after
And 2.689125 people raped outright by a person who likely raped to rape because they were unknown to the victim
b
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:50 pm
Tim Murray Says:
March 3rd, 2008 at 11:03 pm
Bernie, I don't doubt your good intentions.
- - -
Thanks Tim and you are right. I figured I would equip the people with the ammo needed to counter these silly numbers if they desired. It can only help in the long run if someone "gets in your face" and you need to put them in their place to keep them off your back.
BTW I made my post after yours without seeing it. I was crunching the numbers so it was not that I was ignoring your advice, which has merit . . . but as odd as it sounds I find crunching numbers relaxing, entertaining, educational and a way to beat boredom.
b
March 4th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Now the statistic is "a woman is raped every 2 minutes"? I thought it was every 4 minutes. Last I checked there was no statistics via any federal agency to support the doubling of rapes in America. Curious if they would be so kind to quote their sources.
To put those stats in perspective, consider the following.
Assuming that one woman IS raped every four minutes, it would behoove the reader to remember that there were 150 million who weren't. Second, rape is not as common as that statistic would lead a person to believe. In a given year, there are more people injured in automobile accidents in the State of Illinois than there are women raped across the entire United States.
In 2004 (newest stats out), there were 94,635 forcible rapes of women reported.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/offenses_reported/violent_crime/forcible_rape.html
In that same year, there were 121,670 people injured in accidents in Illinois.
http://www.dot.il.gov/travelstats/2004its.pdf
Rape is a heinous crime, no doubt about that. But somehow, the statistics just don't warrant the level of ire that we give it.
March 4th, 2008 at 3:17 am
Oh, I can't help but to tear at these stats some more.
If 42% of women who are raped never report it to anyone... How can we verify that 42% of women didn't report it? (And quoting WOW or another even more hostile group doesn't count as a valid source.)
As for 1% of men who commit rape being arrested, I can blow that completely out of the water. Remember that 94,635 forcible rapes of women were reported. Well, in 2004, 26,066 assailants were arrested. That's over 25% and this doesn't account for assailants who had multiple reports against them (repeat offenders), so that percentage may be even higher.
http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/cius_04/persons_arrested/table_29.html
As for 25% or college women are survivors of rape...
In 2004, there were 10.975 million women enrolled in undergraduate degrees (I'm leaving out graduate degrees). If EVERY single one of those forcible rapes that were reported happened to a college woman, that would still only amount to about 8%. Even accounting for the 42% magical number above, that would still mean that 12.2% of college aged women were raped. And that's making the HUGE assumption that ALL rapes happen to college aged women.
http://nces.ed.gov/programs/digest/d06/tables/dt06_215.asp
And my counter to 85% of women knew their rapist stat... In 2003, 71% of all murders involving boyfriends and girlfriends are committed by the female. I can survive rape. I can't survive murder.
http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/pdf/fvs03.pdf
March 4th, 2008 at 3:56 am
Ian Mitchell Says:
March 4th, 2008 at 3:17 am
= = =
Ian
Numbers are fun are they not?
b
March 4th, 2008 at 4:02 am
I think that the "Girls Gone Wild" CD’s clearly demonstrates the risks that many women (especially collage women) are willing to take without accepting the seriousness and the responsibility that goes along with these actions. This does not justify rape but people still have to accept their part of what they may have done to encourage manning themselves a target.
b
March 4th, 2008 at 4:07 am
I have seen women become drunk at a bar and decide that it would be a good idea to draw even more attention to themselves by climbing on the bar to dance seductively and remove some clothes. They did this on their own, the problem, above the bar were circulation fans. I have seen more than one woman break the fans with their heads, even after being warned about that possibility, they could have been very seriously injured, somehow I guess that this was not the woman’s fault but the men in the bar that got them hurt.
b
March 4th, 2008 at 6:12 am
Bernie M.,
If I missed your subtle use of statistical irony, I apologize.
Sincerely.
It is possible that I just did not get your point.
If so, I will compensate for my tragic momentary ambiguity with superfluous compliments about all your future posts.
That would work out OK, right?
You have seen drunken women behaving badly at bars?
I simply can't imagine that.
March 4th, 2008 at 8:09 am
I found the link to the study I reference in a counter op-ed to the Heather MacDonald article about working the 'rape crisis' hotline.
http://glennsacks.com/blog/?p=1860#comments
The woman who wrote the article was citing it as evidence that MacDonald was wrong and I had to laugh cause she certainly read something different in that report than I did. The op-ed is largely a personal attack on MacDonald.
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/la-oew-macdonald27feb27,0,6130673.story
March 4th, 2008 at 10:52 am
Lewis, the article you cite is one of the most vicious anti-male screeches I have ever read. The author's premise is that "of course there's a rape crisis on campus, because we say so."
Agitators such as this young woman author are furious that nobody shares their twisted view of the male gender (esp. the students), and they justify the absence of rape complaints by saying "some women are confused about what happened to them and whose fault it is." (See my post above: at the Univ. of Pittsburgh in 2006, among approx. 18,000 female students there was ONE complaint of sexual assault to campus police). In other words, we have vast numbers of rape victims who don't know they were victimized by evil men. The men, of course, certainly must know they are the "perpetrators."
This is offensive to any fair minded person. If they ever did an accurate, scientific study of the "problem," based on the LEGAL definition of rape (which couldn't care less about the woman's secret, subjective desires -- it only concerns itlself with the woman's manfiestations of consent or lack of constent ), AND included men in the survrey, we would likely have a much fairer picture. (Note they exclude men from their rape surveys because, presumably, men lie -- when it comes to rape, one gender is deemed incapable of lying while the other is comprised of pathological liars).
Everybody except the radical gender feminists knows there is no campus rape epidemic. The only conclusion that can be drawn about those who claim there is is that they hate men and don't care if they disparage an entire gender.
March 4th, 2008 at 11:56 am
Glad I'm not the only one who saw it as that. Also as far as I could tell most of her 'sources' don't really agree with each other.
I am sometimes unhappy with my employment situation and think more education would be beneficial but I'm not as unhappy as any return to a college campus would likely make me. I'm glad I'm not just out of high school and faced with the prospect of having to go to college. **shudders**
March 4th, 2008 at 3:00 pm
roy Says:
March 4th, 2008 at 6:12 am
Bernie M.,
If I missed your subtle use of statistical irony, I apologize.
= = =
Awwww forgitaboutit, I have. It is very difficult to decipher sarcasm on blogs; I know that, so I really do not take it personally. I know some people so good at it in person that most around them have to ask if they are serious or are so embarrassed that someone could think that way they walk away while I am turned around crying because I am laughing so hard that these people to take the jokester so seriously . . . have fun
b
"If so, I will compensate for my tragic momentary ambiguity with superfluous compliments about all your future posts."
Who am I to argue with such clarity of thought and the epiphany that you had
"That would work out OK, right?"
That would we satisfatory
"You have seen drunken women behaving badly at bars?
I simply can't imagine that."
Amazing huh?
b
March 4th, 2008 at 4:40 pm
All right--
I want to point out one important thing.
Bernie and Roy are comrades now, because we had the good masculine sense to avoid the typical flame wars and imaginary screen conflagrations.
This is what MEN do.
It is not difficult.
It simply requires that men discount everything women say about us,.
That is funny, right?
March 4th, 2008 at 9:45 pm
LOL it has received my vote LOL
b
March 4th, 2008 at 10:40 pm
Yet another reason to say "No" when the alumni association of your college hits you up for a donation. Colleges are such pits of anti-male hatred that a male donating money to a college is like a Jew donating money to the Nazi Party!
March 4th, 2008 at 11:15 pm
Rob,
Or one could donate a substantial sum of money under the express condition that a plaque be put on display in a prominent location expressing the virtues of men.
I almost feel like that would have a more satisfying effect over the long term.
March 4th, 2008 at 11:34 pm
Jason, I fear any such plaque would be deemed "hate speech" and discriminatory. Reverse the genders and its laudatory. Lie about men being rapists and that's just "fact." Tout the need to donate to eradicate women's diseases and that's just fitting because so little attention is paid to women. The list goes on and on.
You know what? MEN are the problem here. Rob is correct about the donation aspect. If men would stop donating to these sorry colleges that promote these lies, every single one of them would close. Every one. Or rather they'd come close to closing, and suddenly you'd see a reverse and all kiinds of things to make men happy. What the hell is wrong with us? I am starting to think our gender is flawed -- so many of us don't realize that they are attacking US.
Hey Mr.Enlightened Dumbass who's going to vote for Hillary because his hipster wife is all gung ho about having a woman president, that could be YOUR son they target next with a false rape allegation at Duke, or at some even more liberal college. Man! Wake up!
March 5th, 2008 at 12:02 am
Tim,
I understand exactly what you are saying... the point I was trying to make is that if that was the condition of the donation it couldn't be accepted and might make any university reconsider any policies it may have that prevents positive things being said about men. Money can be a powerful motivator.
I agree with you though... supporting universities that actively slander an entire gender is a bad move.
March 5th, 2008 at 12:06 am
Unfortunately, though, in the modern world, I have to support SOME university. 4 years of slander and insults based nothing more on who I was born into...and all for some piece of paper whose alleged importance I still have yet to understand.
March 5th, 2008 at 1:42 pm
Tim Murray Says:
March 3rd, 2008 at 7:16 pm
Gwallan, there are few reported cases of such misconduct constituting rape, but if a woman took advantage of a wholly insensible man in the manner you describe, it would be a form of sexual assault.
= = =
According to many states definition of rape that was rape . . .
It does include of a party was intoxicated therefore not able to make an unimpaired decision to have sex (it is tantamount to drugging your partner)
b
March 7th, 2008 at 10:39 pm
Ian Mitchell Says:
March 4th, 2008 at 2:25 am
Now the statistic is "a woman is raped every 2 minutes"? I thought it was every 4 minutes.
In 2004 (newest stats out), there were 94,635 forcible rapes of women reported.
= = =
FYI
Your numbers state every 5' 34.2"
b
March 21st, 2008 at 11:44 pm
OPE Office of Postsecondary Education Data
PUTTING THE NUMBERS TO REST
CAUTIONARY NOTES
The statistics found on this website represent alleged criminal offenses reported to campus security authorities and/or local police agencies. Therefore, the data collected do not necessarily reflect prosecutions or convictions for crime. Which of course after presented with the facts would be lower.
7059 American Schools
Sex offenses - Forcible (all not rape)
4779
Sex offenses - Non-forcible (all not rape)
2033
total
6812 equaling not even 1 sexual offence let alone rape per school per 2006 year
b
March 22nd, 2008 at 4:38 pm
So I guess there are less than 3 students per collage/university to equal 25% rape stats?
b
March 30th, 2009 at 6:18 pm
I just wanted to say that I love this site