Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:Ok, so I was out by 50 million, but the idea that almost 40% of the pop. has either been raped or carried out a rape...well, if people believe that then there's a bridge I've got for sale.

You still had to make some big assumptions to get there. You assumed that all rapes and rapists were unique values, which flies in the face of everything we know about crime. That RIGHT THERE is probably enough to kill your point.

If the rapists average 2 victims each, which I don't think is an unreasonable supposition for the sake of argument, you've cut 1/4 off your number RIGHT THERE>


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Rape statistics, unfortunately, are notoriously unreliable for reasons exemplified in this thread. There's no agreement over what to count and when to count it whether to include unreported rape estimates from surveys or not, etc etc.

The reporting rate is even totally unknown. We have a vague idea of it because we can survey people, but social norms shift around all the time, so the reporting rate could by wildly fluctuating and we would be hard pressed to figure out what it was.


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Tell you what guys, I'll try for a second time to drop the male rape subject if it means we can argue about statistics, BUT if someone brings it back up again like last time, I'm GOING to argue back. Deal?

dogma wrote:Does it only include penetration?
Does penetration "count" if it involves something other than a phallus?
what constitutes consent, especially given the circumstances under which consent is or is not given
What constitutes a reasonable assessment of offered consent for a married couple is distinct from the same thing for two random people coming home from a bar.

No.

Yes.

An agreement to have sexual relations at that moment which is not coerced.

No, it doesn't, because husbands can rape their wives and vice versa-- getting married does not mean you relinquish control of what's between your legs.

Do_I_Not_Like_That wrote:I like to think that people on this site are pretty smart, so let's do the maths.

America = pop.250 million (roughly)

The survey is estimating that 20% have been raped,abused,attacked etc by a partner = 50 million.

Let's assume for arguments sake that every victim was attacked by a different individual = 50 million

In other words, 100 million people, almost half the pop. have been raped,attacked or carried out these crimes!

Given that 30,000?? are killed by guns every year, another 20,000? are killed by cars, and some other survey on this site a few weeks ago was saying that 1 in 5 are on anti - depression medicine... I mean sweet jesus!! I refuse to believe that the nation that gave the world, Bill Hicks, Larry Hagman, Joe Frazier, John Adams, FDR, James Stewart, Martin Luther King, George Kennedy, Thomas Paine (I know he was born in the UK) etc etc has really went downhill so badly.

You forgot the part about it saying that 20% of women have been raped.

Melissia wrote:

dogma wrote:Does it only include penetration?
Does penetration "count" if it involves something other than a phallus?
what constitutes consent, especially given the circumstances under which consent is or is not given
What constitutes a reasonable assessment of offered consent for a married couple is distinct from the same thing for two random people coming home from a bar.

No.

Yes.

An agreement to have sexual relations at that moment which is not coerced.

No, it doesn't, because husbands can rape their wives and vice versa-- getting married does not mean you relinquish control of what's between your legs.

FIrst 3 I 100% agree.

On the last one though, I really do believe there is such a thing as assumed consent to a point. Dan Savage actually talked about this a week or two ago on his podcast. Basically I can walk up to my girlfriend and do things to her without asking that would count as rape out in public because we have an understanding of assumed consent. However, on the flip side, she can still revoke that at any time. If I come up and start doing things and she turns around and says no, I have to stop. No harm for what happened at first, but once she gives me a for real no, I've got to stop. It's my responsibility to be able to tell the difference. She can revoke that assumed consent at ANY MOMENT and I have to honor that. And abusing that is absolutely still rape.

So basically you are saying rape is not:

-doing things like telling you lies, making promises about the future they knew were untrue, threatening to end your relationship, or threatening to spread rumors about you?

-wearing you down by repeatedly asking for sex, or showing they were unhappy?

AustonT wrote:So basically you are saying rape is

Threatening someone is a form of coercion. It does not have to be a threat of force or violence.

Melissia wrote:

AustonT wrote:So basically you are saying rape is

Threatening someone is a form of coercion. It does not have to be a threat of force or violence.

First of all I asked a pretty specific question. Edit: decided not to be a tool

And I answered it with a non-specific answer which applies to your question

Yes and why don't you provide a definition of coercion to go with it so I don't have to use this silly "dictionary" any more.

The questions I provided were form the questionnaire referenced in the OP and definitely don't demonstrate any from of coercion.

Given questions like that counting as "rape" it seems little surprise that their numbers are heavily inflated. Since I somehow doubt that in 24.7 minutes the survey takers were able to open up a channel to their respondents deep emotionally scarring events.

AustonT wrote:The questions I provided were form the questionnaire referenced in the OP and definitely don't demonstrate any from of coercion.

If you think this:

AustonT wrote:threatening to end your relationship, or threatening to spread rumors about you?

Isn't coercion, you have a weird definition of coercion.

Coercion is forcing another to behave involuntarily through threats, intimidation, and other kinds of pressures or force. This includes psychological threats.

As an aside:

Yes and why don't you provide a definition of coercion to go with it so I don't have to use this silly "dictionary" any more.

If you were using a dictionary you might have seen where I'm coming from (as I've pulled these phrases directly out of a few dictionaries practically verbatim), so this statement is obviously pointless as you weren't using one to begin with.

Black-mail is coercion.

Melissia wrote:
No, it doesn't, because husbands can rape their wives and vice versa-- getting married does not mean you relinquish control of what's between your legs.

I'm not saying that its impossible to rape someone you are involved with, it certainly is. I'm saying that what constitutes the provision of consent is different where the relationship is different.

Remember, consent doesn't mean the absence of objection, but I think it begins to approach that where a romantic relationship exists. Perhaps not regarding rape, but certainly regarding sexual assault in general. Grabbing a random stranger's ass is very different from the same action performed on a significant other.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:

dogma wrote:Does it only include penetration?

No.

So, essentially, you want to erase the distinction between sexual assault and rape?

AustonT wrote:Given questions like that counting as "rape" it seems little surprise that their numbers are heavily inflated. Since I somehow doubt that in 24.7 minutes the survey takers were able to open up a channel to their respondents deep emotionally scarring events.

Please be sure to draw a distinction between the survey brought up in this thread and the more esoteric and grey area of the borderline distinctions Melissia's getting into. Sebster originally raised the same objection you just have, as regards excessively-broad definitions of rape. Then he read the article/survey, and realized that's not an issue with this one. I agree that some definitions of rape are overly-broad and do risk weakening the word. But those aren't what this survey is talking about.

Sebster, on page 3 of this thread wrote:EDIT - and finally the PDF is working for me. It's an interesting read, and just to pick out the part on rape, they actually do give a very specific, sensible breakdown on what they consider rape;
"any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal (for women), oral, or anal penetration through the use of physical force (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threats to physically harm and includes times when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent"

Within that, you see the following breakdown of what women have reported;

Completed forced penetration - 12.3% of women or 14,617,000 in the US
Attempted forced penetration - 5.2% of women or 6,199,000 in the US
Completed alcohol/drug facilitated penetration - 8.0% or 9,524,000 in the US


I take it all back, their definition is sound and their conclusions are seriously frightening.

dogma wrote:
So, essentially, you want to erase the distinction between sexual assault and rape?

In most states, there is no distinction. "Sexual assault" is just legal speak for rape.

Perhaps there was a distinction in the methodology of the survey.

That is what we need to be looking at.

Kilkrazy wrote:Perhaps there was a distinction in the methodology of the survey.

That is what we need to be looking at.

The methodology of the survey was posted 2 posts ago.

Yes, but you do not seem to be clear on it.

dogma wrote:So, essentially, you want to erase the distinction between sexual assault and rape?

If you want to claim that t he only way you can be raped or sexually assaulted is by being penetrated, then I would argue you have a highly sexist, heteronormative view of sex which you need to rethink.

Rented Tritium wrote:
In most states, there is no distinction. "Sexual assault" is just legal speak for rape.

While that's true, its not strictly illustrative. Sexual assault is usually classified according to degree, with rape being 1st or 2nd degree sexual assault (the division is the use of a weapon, or the causing of bodily harm).


Automatically Appended Next Post:

Melissia wrote:If you want to claim that t he only way you can be raped or sexually assaulted is by being penetrated, then I would argue you have a highly sexist, heteronormative view of sex which you need to rethink.

I would say the same thing about you, since you seem to be implying that penetration requires a phallus.

dogma wrote:I would say the same thing about you, since you seem to be implying that penetration requires a phallus.

I'm not saying that at all.

Relapse wrote:I never thought I'd ever be laughing so hard about such a serious subject, but damn, people, these last few posts have gotten me to the point where I can barely breath!
Starting with Matty's posts and everyone getting worked up by it to Joey insinuating he's out to rape him a Royal Marine To teach him a lesson, followed by Machete and the Weiner.... Not to mention strap on wearing female rapists roaming the country side as presented by Melissa.
All I can say is in before lock!

This thread has been excellent.