Rape Victims Don't Know They Were Raped

[CBL4]

The opening paragraph of the article said nearly 10%. I did not realize that the "reporter" change 8.5% to nearly 10%. I multiplying 0.247 x 10% = 2.5% (approximately.)

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

 

[Cleon]

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

Ah, good, just as long as you're following the evidence.

 

[CBL4]

I re-read the article realized I misread something. The 10% figure was attempted rape and the 8.5% was actual rape. My previous comment about the reporter was wrong.

CBL

 

[C.J.]

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.

Brigham is a psychologist, and in most psychological studies, a woman's self-identification as a rape victim, or lack thereof, is not the determinant of whether or not she's been raped. Rather, it's whether she has been through an experience that meets the legal definitions applicable in a state. Given the lack of access to the methods of the original study, and that Brigham appears to have a publication record in peer-reviewed journals, I think it's safe to assume that he's following the conventions of the field and using state law as the basis for his definition of rape.*

If you grant that this is the case**, then all you can say is that many of the women in the Brigham et al. study who were raped according to the laws of the state of Washington did not identify the event as a rape to researchers. This is in itself an interesting research question, but it in no way indicates that Brigham et al. were "absurd" in how they pursued or reported their research findinds.

C.J.

* I admit this is an assumption, but I find it a reasonable one to make under the circumstances. If you can demonstrate to me that Brigham et al. were using an overly broad definition of rape, then I'll adjust my response accordingly.

**

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

Well, maybe you won't grant that this is the case, but you'll have to present some evidence that Brigham et al. have an agenda, and "I don't like/believe the results" doesn't count.

 

[Metullus]

And the problem with our society that labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting. Not to mention the use of alcohol and having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out and calling it something other than rape.

Have you evidence in support of your assertion?

I have heard of men accused of rape using some of these as defenses, but I am not aware that "our society" "labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting". If I am not mistaken the contrary is in fact true, these are crimes - at least in every state in which I have lived. As is knowingly "having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out" or not otherwise capable of giving consent.

 

[TragicMonkey]

Um, I don't want to derail or anything, but a question just occured to me and it's bugging me because I can't answer it.

Is consensual sex in a case of mistaken identity rape?

I mean, when one party deliberately deceives the other, who consents to sex but would not have had they known the other party was someone else. Like, if an identical twin swapped places with his brother and slept with his sister-in-law without her knowing about the switch. It certainly seems wrong, but is it rape?

 

[CBL4]

Originally posted by CJ
n most psychological studies, a woman's self-identification as a rape victim, or lack thereof, is not the determinant of whether or not she's been raped. Rather, it's whether she has been through an experience that meets the legal definitions applicable in a state. Given the lack of access to the methods of the original study, and that Brigham appears to have a publication record in peer-reviewed journals, I think it's safe to assume that he's following the conventions of the field and using state law as the basis for his definition of rape

This is exactly what I mean by "trivialization." If a woman believes she has been raped, I tend to believe her. If a woman does not think she has been raped, I tend to believe her.

If psychologists (or the legal system) redefine rape to include 4 times as many people, then I believe that this trivializes real rape. Rape is a horrible event. An "unwanted experience" is something very different.

Some idiot feminists have defined rape to include many consensual sexual encounters e.g. verbal persuasion mean rape. I am immediately suspicious of researchers whose interpretations are this far from the victims. Unfortunately, the news reports do not give provide a good distinction between "rape" and "unwanted experience." Nor do they provide the question list. This makes it very difficult to make firm conclusions.

As I said, I trust the victims' perceptions.

CBL

 

[epepke]

The issue of rape is that it is non-consesual sex, it does not have to be forced by physical violence, but it can be non-consensual for a wide variety of reasons that a victim might not label as rape.

There's a good place to go for the definition, and that's the laws.

Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners, how often do you think a victim might not call rape as rape?

Get a grip! You're going off into histrionic delusion-land here. I'm 44, and as far as I can remember, American Culture has been such that at every turn its participants have tried to make me feel ashamed of the fact that I have a penis.

I've seen Andrea Dworkin and Christina Hoff-Sommers in person. Dworkin recieved a $3000 honorarium from the Women's Center and talked to a crowd of 300, most of them cheering. Hoff-Sommers got expenses provided by a local students' group, talked to about 40, and the Women's Studies program felt fit to provide a heckling line of four people that jeered at her practically every full stop.

And for the statistics, well this is part of crime reporting by all sorts of victims but don't let that deter you from being a sceptic and touting 'sceince' when it suits your political agenda.[/QUOTE]

 

[Dancing David]

Your bias is showing.

Most likely, but those are examples of forced sex that are not often called rape.

 

[Dancing David]

I read of rape perps claiming the first two items on your list, but I have never heard of the third. Do you have a citation for anyone claiming that?

It is usualy a family thing where a parent is aware of the sexual abuse in a family and doesn't view it as unacceptable behavior. Not common but still occurs , what I find more frightening is when a child tells a parent they have been sexually assaulted and the parent responds by calling the child a liar. I am not saying that there aren't children who are manipulative, I just find the case where a child reports sexual abuse to the non-offending parent and the n.o. parents punishes or shames the child disturbing.

 

[Dancing David]

The opening paragraph of the article said nearly 10%. I did not realize that the "reporter" change 8.5% to nearly 10%. I multiplying 0.247 x 10% = 2.5% (approximately.)

If there were a slight difference between the rape report of the women and researcher I would buy it. However, the researchers report over 4 times as many rapes as the women study. This is absurd. In addition, the women would presumably use the "societal" definition of rape. The newspaper readers would share this definition and a rate of 2.1% should have been reported.

I would also guess that the researchers tailored their poll questions to maximize the reported occurence of rape. This is a common tactic among "researchers" with an agenda.

CBL

The societal definition of rape is a variable one which is why, as two poster have pointed out, it is not generaly used. The legal definition of rape is fairly clear.

The societal standard for rape can vary and sometimes excludes the following:
-a victim willing going to the apartment of the perptrator
-the victim accepts a ride from the perpetrator
-the victim had consented to sex on a prior occesion but did not consent at the time
-the victim wore provocative clothing
-the victim was passed out
-the victim is married, dating or living with the perpetrator
-the victim is over the age of thirtenn
-the victim should have known it would happen

(please insert 'alleged' prior to each use of victim and perpetrator)

 

[Dancing David]

Have you evidence in support of your assertion?

I have heard of men accused of rape using some of these as defenses, but I am not aware that "our society" "labels date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable partenting". If I am not mistaken the contrary is in fact true, these are crimes - at least in every state in which I have lived. As is knowingly "having non-consensual sex with people who are passed out" or not otherwise capable of giving consent.

Well, I suggest that I did state my case forcefully but I suggest that you survey a wide variety of people about the following topics, and that you focus on small twon and rural areas. Which is the population I serve quite often:

1. Can a woman refuse sex with her husband?
2. Can a woman agree to sex and then change her mind any time during the act?
3. Can a victim behave in ways that lead to them being vitims, through clothing, going for a ride or enterenting an apartment.
4. I live in a large college town, the non-consensual sex with a victim who is passed out is very common, and the perptrators and thier friends do not view it as rape.

 

[Dancing David]

There's a good place to go for the definition, and that's the laws.

Which is what I am refering to, are you okay?
There is a vast difference between the legal defintion of rape and the societal definition of rape.

Get a grip! You're going off into histrionic delusion-land here. I'm 44, and as far as I can remember, American Culture has been such that at every turn its participants have tried to make me feel ashamed of the fact that I have a penis.

I live in a large twon, it is in a rural area, when I was in high school, there were frinds of mine who reprted that they had been sexualy assaulted in a date stituation or for accepting a ride home, in college I had friends who were date raped and also had been sexualy assualted under the influence of alcohol.

That is not delusion land, especialy the fact that in many parts of our society the victim is blamed for the sexual behavior of the perpetrator , they are shamed for repoting the crime and often ostracised.
Last week I interviewed a woman who repotrted that when she was sixteen she was sexualy assaulted by a member of her church, she reported the crime. The consequence was that she was harrased by the grandchildren of the perpetrator and she felt she should drop out of high school.

I've seen Andrea Dworkin and Christina Hoff-Sommers in person. Dworkin recieved a $3000 honorarium from the Women's Center and talked to a crowd of 300, most of them cheering. Hoff-Sommers got expenses provided by a local students' group, talked to about 40, and the Women's Studies program felt fit to provide a heckling line of four people that jeered at her practically every full stop.

I don't recall mentioning Dworkin or Sommers, but perhaps I am remiss and have forgotten.
There are radical feminists, there is no evidence that Brigham is one.

And for the statistics, well this is part of crime reporting by all sorts of victims but don't let that deter you from being a sceptic and touting 'sceince' when it suits your political agenda.

It also doesn't prevent CBL4 from saying that the researchers have an agenda when there is no evidence that there is one, do you feel that the researchers have an agenda?

 

[C.J.]

This is exactly what I mean by "trivialization." If a woman believes she has been raped, I tend to believe her. If a woman does not think she has been raped, I tend to believe her.

I know you're using the word "tend" here, but would you believe a woman who said she had been raped using some, as you put it, "idiot feminist" definition? Given the tenor of your comments, probably not, which brings me to my next point:

If psychologists (or the legal system) redefine rape to include 4 times as many people, then I believe that this trivializes real rape. Rape is a horrible event. An "unwanted experience" is something very different.

Indeed, rape is a horrible event, and there are plenty of "unwanted experiences" that do not meet that standard.

But tell me, what is real rape? You use the term above, so you obviously have some conception of what constitutes a "real" rape. I'd like to know what definition you are using, but if you'd rather not share it or only have a vaguely defined concept, that's okay. My point is simply to get you thinking about it, and thinking about what it means when my definition of "real rape" and your definition of "real rape" differ. Who's right? Does real rape require that the victim be physically injured? Does the victim have to physically struggle for it to be real rape? What about forced oral or anal sex? Is that real rape? Or do only victims get to define rape?

Because this last question is what you imply when you say that psychologists/lawyers are "redefining" rape to quadruple the numbers of victims. And the only group I'm aware of that takes this approach are really radical feminists.

Some idiot feminists have defined rape to include many consensual sexual encounters e.g. verbal persuasion mean rape. I am immediately suspicious of researchers whose interpretations are this far from the victims.

Note that the Brigham study, if it's typical of the area, has a very limited and specific definition of rape that is predicated around unwanted penetration by force or threat of force. It seems from your post you are concerned with definitions of rape that are overbroad, but the use of legal or legally-derived definitions in psychological research is designed to avoid just this pitfall.

Unfortunately, the news reports do not give provide a good distinction between "rape" and "unwanted experience." Nor do they provide the question list. This makes it very difficult to make firm conclusions.

True. It would be nice to have more info; in the study itself they are certain to be clear about their definitions.

As I said, I trust the victims' perceptions.

Victim perceptions are important, but so is the actuality of the event. If a woman did not want to have intercourse, but a man used force or the threat of force to penetrate her despite that, wouldn't you call that rape? What if the woman involved didn't?

 

[Ladewig]

I read of rape perps claiming the first two items on your list, but I have never heard of the third. Do you have a citation for anyone claiming that?

It is usualy a family thing where a parent is aware of the sexual abuse in a family and doesn't view it as unacceptable behavior. Not common but still occurs...

That is not a citation. That is simply a repitition of your claim. Can you point me to a U.S. criminal case where that was used as a defense; I'm not even asking for a case where it was successfully used as a defense (although I could ask for that given that the original claim was that "our society ... labels ... child rape as acceptable parenting"). Heck, I'll even settle for a blog that states it is acceptable parenting.

... what I find more frightening is when a child tells a parent they have been sexually assaulted and the parent responds by calling the child a liar. I am not saying that there aren't children who are manipulative, I just find the case where a child reports sexual abuse to the non-offending parent and the n.o. parents punishes or shames the child disturbing.

I agree that there are instances of that occurring in the U.S., but aren't those cases a matter of the non-offending parent being afraid of the offending spouse or being afraid of what will happen to the family after the crime is reported or being in denial about the matter - none of which involves considering the rape to be acceptable. Unlike you, I consider this second case to be less frightening than the first situation - i.e. accepting that the rape happened and that nothing should be done.

 

[Metullus]

Well, I suggest that I did state my case forcefully but I suggest that you survey a wide variety of people about the following topics, and that you focus on small twon and rural areas. Which is the population I serve quite often:

1. Can a woman refuse sex with her husband?
2. Can a woman agree to sex and then change her mind any time during the act?
3. Can a victim behave in ways that lead to them being vitims, through clothing, going for a ride or enterenting an apartment.
4. I live in a large college town, the non-consensual sex with a victim who is passed out is very common, and the perptrators and thier friends do not view it as rape.

That some people may believe these things to be acceptable is a long way from our society labeling such behaviors as acceptable. Never in my adult life have I encountered anyone that argues that a woman cannot refuse to have sex with her husband - indeed, if anything, the complaint I am more likely to hear is that a wife is, for whatever reason, refusing to do so, and there is nothing short of giving up bowling that the husband can do to change her mind. And the fact is that men have been convicted of sexually assaulting their wives.

Can a victim behave in ways that lead them to be victims? Of course they can. Walking home alone from a bar at 2:00am might, for example, lend itself to a certain vulnerability to attack. Accepting a ride from a stranger might accomplish the same thing. Wearing provocative clothing might attract unwanted attention. Even entering an apartment would certainly not decrease a woman's vulnerability. Does that mean that the victim is in any way responsible for the attack? No. Two different questions.

Am I surprised that non-consensual sex with a victim that is unconscious might be not uncommon in a college town? Regrettably, no (although I would ask for evidence in support of such a claim). A lot of idiots and creeps live in college towns. Am I surprised that the perpetrators of such an act would not consider it to be wrong? Again, no; but then most rapists don't consider their crimes to be "wrong". Or if they did they have an interest in not admitting to the fact.

You did a bit more than state your case "forcefully". You explicitly stated that our society considered "date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable [parenting]." Do you stand by that statement, or am I to interpret your latest post as a repudiation of that statement?

 

[epepke]

Which is what I am refering to, are you okay?

Fine, thanks.

I live in a large twon, it is in a rural area, when I was in high school, there were frinds of mine who reprted that they had been sexualy assaulted in a date stituation or for accepting a ride home, in college I had friends who were date raped and also had been sexualy assualted under the influence of alcohol.

Yeah. So report it to the police, and get it prosecuted.

That is not delusion land, especialy the fact that in many parts of our society the victim is blamed for the sexual behavior of the perpetrator , they are shamed for repoting the crime and often ostracised.

Delusion land is where you claim, and I quote: "Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners..."

That's just wrong.

Yes, rape happens. Yes, it's bad. Yes, it should be prosecuted.

The idea that American culture acts like rape is just peachy keen is delusional.

Last week I interviewed a woman who repotrted that when she was sixteen she was sexualy assaulted by a member of her church, she reported the crime. The consequence was that she was harrased by the grandchildren of the perpetrator and she felt she should drop out of high school.

I believe you.

But first, of course the system is imperfect. Of course there isn't universal protection. Let me remind you that I did bodyguard duty for three women with restraining orders against males.

But also, and this should be obvious, you're a social worker. That means that you only see the cases where the system hasn't worked. Generalizing that idea to the whole of American society is unsupportable.

Not that I condemn you. I admire you for doing this. But you're simply going to get a skewed idea of reality if you try to generalize. The majority of rape cases are handled appropriately. If anything, they're biased toward the victim. At FSU, an entire fraternity was demolished because two of the members raped a blacked-out drunk woman. But you do not see them, because of your choice of profession.

 

[Dancing David]

That is not a citation. That is simply a repitition of your claim. Can you point me to a U.S. criminal case where that was used as a defense; I'm not even asking for a case where it was successfully used as a defense (although I could ask for that given that the original claim was that "our society ... labels ... child rape as acceptable parenting"). Heck, I'll even settle for a blog that states it is acceptable parenting.



I agree that there are instances of that occurring in the U.S., but aren't those cases a matter of the non-offending parent being afraid of the offending spouse or being afraid of what will happen to the family after the crime is reported or being in denial about the matter - none of which involves considering the rape to be acceptable. Unlike you, I consider this second case to be less frightening than the first situation - i.e. accepting that the rape happened and that nothing should be done.

I think that I am using the word 'society' in a different sense than you do, I take it as the interactions of the collective of humans in a population,. So that would include the legal systems and formal networks of a society as defined legaly but it would alos include the consensus actions of individuals which have a collective impact.

I have nothing other than the anecdotes of fiveteen years of social work and I have interviewed more than 400 in mental health assesments and probably about sixty in domestic violence assesments, so it is all anecdotal. I would say that this event of the non-offending parent accepting the behavior of the offending parent has been told to me at least ten times. So given the law of thirds I believe it to be true in three cases. Then there is also this more common thing that is really ooky to me where a parent who is not offending tolerates the sexual behavior with an older step child, which is really strange but I have heard about thirty times, so I belive ten of them to be true.

So all anecdotal and best, and that was some hyperbole in that statement, which may cause people to doubt my validity as a reporter.

Now the case of the non-offending parent just not believing thier child seems to be fairly common, but that would be streching the use of the word 'acceptable', and the domestic violence component is unfortunately widespread.

In terms of formal social networks, I feel that child protective services are failing the children on a number of levels, that still would not constiture 'acceptance' so , it was hyperbole.

 

[Dancing David]

That some people may believe these things to be acceptable is a long way from our society labeling such behaviors as acceptable. Never in my adult life have I encountered anyone that argues that a woman cannot refuse to have sex with her husband - indeed, if anything, the complaint I am more likely to hear is that a wife is, for whatever reason, refusing to do so, and there is nothing short of giving up bowling that the husband can do to change her mind. And the fact is that men have been convicted of sexually assaulting their wives.

I suppose that you and I have encountered different people, my work brings me into contact with the more unfortunate of society, I have interviewed twenty women who reported that the local police refused to take thier report of rape. I can only guess at the level of validity of these reports.

I agree that marital rape is a crime now, but if you speak with community educators about sexual assault, they may still report the same responses that they recieved in the seventies. I don't know, I had a very good friend who frequently spoke to high schools on the subject of rape from 1978 to 1983, in small twons she ofetn encountered very strong resistance to the idea of marital rape.
I may be very outdated, and would be thrilled to think that was the case.

Can a victim behave in ways that lead them to be victims? Of course they can. Walking home alone from a bar at 2:00am might, for example, lend itself to a certain vulnerability to attack. Accepting a ride from a stranger might accomplish the same thing. Wearing provocative clothing might attract unwanted attention. Even entering an apartment would certainly not decrease a woman's vulnerability. Does that mean that the victim is in any way responsible for the attack? No. Two different questions.

Yes I agree, but I still have heard people blame victims for exactly those things. And the rides I was discussing were not from strangers but aquantences in high schools.

Am I surprised that non-consensual sex with a victim that is unconscious might be not uncommon in a college town? Regrettably, no (although I would ask for evidence in support of such a claim).

I believe that there were a twenty reported case of drunk rape in the town where I live, I will have to get back to you on that.

A lot of idiots and creeps live in college towns. Am I surprised that the perpetrators of such an act would not consider it to be wrong?

I am more concerned about thier roomates and friends not telling them to stop.

Again, no; but then most rapists don't consider their crimes to be "wrong". Or if they did they have an interest in not admitting to the fact.

You did a bit more than state your case "forcefully". You explicitly stated that our society considered "date rape as consensual, marital rape as sanctioned by god and child rape as acceptable [parenting]." Do you stand by that statement, or am I to interpret your latest post as a repudiation of that statement?

No I shant repudiate myself, but date rape is very common, and it is not sanctioned. The marital rape issue is open to debate,it is an unsubstantiated claim.

I am guilty of hyperbole no doubt. I still feel that my statements contain truth. Maybe I should increase my medication, and get more sleep. I may have assumed I was posting with Jedi Knight and got out of control.

 

[Dancing David]

Fine, thanks.

That is good.

Yeah. So report it to the police, and get it prosecuted.

Not mine to do, some did tell the teachers in thier schools and well, they were told to ignore it, but that was thirty years ago, so hopefully the world has changed.

Delusion land is where you claim, and I quote: "Given that american culture acts like having testicles allows you to demand sex from unwilling partners..."

That's just wrong.

Yes, rape happens. Yes, it's bad. Yes, it should be prosecuted.

The idea that American culture acts like rape is just peachy keen is delusional.

the idea that american as individuals always condemn the act of rape would be equally delusional, I would use the word mistaken, I do know my statements to be hyperbole. That means they are not delusions.

I believe you.

But first, of course the system is imperfect. Of course there isn't universal protection. Let me remind you that I did bodyguard duty for three women with restraining orders against males.

i am glad that you helped them. very dangerous.

But also, and this should be obvious, you're a social worker. That means that you only see the cases where the system hasn't worked. Generalizing that idea to the whole of American society is unsupportable.

Guilty of hyperbole. Not guilty of genralization, any more than reserachers are stupid for using an objective rather than a subjective standard for judging reported rapes.

Not that I condemn you. I admire you for doing this. But you're simply going to get a skewed idea of reality if you try to generalize.

Nah, I am twisted already, the profession just gives me more ammo to tout my twisted beliefs. It has something to do with my childhood and alien abductions.

The majority of rape cases are handled appropriately.

Well considering the lack of reporting and the difficulty of prosecution and the alarming false conviction rates, I can't agree.

If anything, they're biased toward the victim. At FSU, an entire fraternity was demolished because two of the members raped a blacked-out drunk woman. But you do not see them, because of your choice of profession.

No I don't see them becaue I live in central illinois. I am sorry that the farternity got razed, sounds like a raw deal. It sure doesn't happen at the ********(name erased) University in my town. But then it is the home of the fraternity and soroity system.

I will willing admit that my sample is very biased, but because of isotropy I believe that the phenomena I have seen in low income and support challeged populations is equaly proportional in the more affluent parts of society.