Differing definitions of rape create opening for misuse
By Ashe Schow (@AsheSchow) • 8/23/16 2:18 PM
Different federal agencies define rape differently, and activists looking to make it look like there's a rape "epidemic" occurring across the country can take their pick of data related to those definitions.
The Government Accountability Office, in response to a request from Sen. Claire McCaskill, D-Mo, discovered the disagreement among federal agencies of what is and is not rape. McCaskill herself is one of the biggest advocates for basing draconian legislation on of a broad definition that results in flawed statistics.
The GAO found "at least 10 efforts to collect data on sexual violence, which differ in target population, terminology, measurements, and methodology." It also found "23 different terms to describe sexual violence."
These definitions lead to vast differences in the number of victims of rape and sexual assault. The FBI's Uniform Crime Reporting system found 84,175 American rape victims in 2011, but the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention — using a much broader definition in a self-reported survey — estimated there were 1,929,000 victims in 2011. That's a 2,200 percent increase.
While the FBI used actual reported crime statistics based on the legal definition of rape, the CDC used a definition so broad it included things like stolen kisses or merely "unwanted contact" that could have been the result of misread signals.
Of course, those pushing an agenda that sexual assault and rape — especially on college campuses — has reached "epidemic" proportions will use the broader definition, even if it is only backed by a self-reported survey. They use this information to promote bills like the Campus Accountability and Safety Act, which insists all accusers be believed and takes steps to ensure accused students have no ability to defend themselves.
GAO watchdogs point out the problem with using various definitions, writing: "Because there is wide variation in the results, entities that use federal data on sexual violence have a choice of which data to use, and entities reported using data that best suited their needs."
This, says Independent Women's Forum Director Sabrina Schaeffer, is used for convenience.
"The GAO is correct that it is crucial to define sexual violence correctly and consistently," Schaeffer told the Weekly Standard. "Too often inflated figures and definitions drive alarmism and ultimately grow government in a way that fashions women as victims and men as abusers. Ultimately, the IWF wants to encourage a culture of responsibility among both men and women so that we can have a healthier and safer society with happier more stable relationships for everyone."
The broadest definition of sexual assault — used by the CDC — has created alarmism through a series of surveys that are all flawed in similar ways and continue to claim 1 in 5 college women as victims of sexual assault. These surveys lump everything from a stolen kiss to forcible rape into the category of sexual assault, even though the vast majority of women said they didn't report any incident because they didn't think it was serious enough.
The GAO recommended that federal agencies make their differing definitions public. This could help in the short-term, as it would force zealous officials like McCaskill to explain what they're claiming is sexual assault. A better solution would be for all federal agencies to use one definition — a serious definition tied to the one used in the legal system. Maybe then we won't be branding our young people as rapists just for kissing someone.
Source
If you're a man who is less than thrilled with Senator Claire McGaskill you may want to let her know about it. Especially if you live in Missouri or are legally able to vote there let her know you are tired of her misandry. Click on "Share you opinion on legislation" to bring up comment form.
Showing posts with label rape definition. Show all posts
Showing posts with label rape definition. Show all posts
Thursday, August 25, 2016
Wednesday, March 2, 2016
Rape is different
Why is “rape” different?
with one comment
What makes rape different from other crimes? Why is it that we seem to have a greater horror of rape than we do of murder? And is this attitude towards it even rational?
I’ve got a friened whose daughter was murdered. NO sexual activity took place and the guy was eventually caught and sent to prison. She actually said to me that would RATHER her daughter HAD been raped but NOT murdered.
I think that’s a completely RATIONAL attitude. Like me, she thinks her daughter’s murderer OUGHT to have been executed instead of sent to jaia. She also thinks that rape is NOT as serious a crime as murder.
That doesn’t mean that I think it’s a trivial matter. Nor does it mean I don’t CARE about women (or men) who get raped. Christ, I’ve BEEN raped myself so I’m not exactly coaching from the sidelines!
Anywya, let’s look at what it IS that seems to make rape a crime of particular horror to so many people. In the first place, IMO, it’s the voyeur in us. It gives a sort of prurient, salacious “edge” to the crime that you don’t get with most offences. Who gets turned on by reading about a Mafia hitman shooting dead a rival mobster? But when a girl gets raped…
Then there’s the frisson of fear. Reading about a rape gives you that shivering feeling and raises your goose pimples (goose bumps). Fear is a huge sexual turn-on for many people.
Then there’s the feeling of helplessness. The woman lost her power to resist and was forced to submit to the man. That’s a huge turn-on as well for many of us.
You’ve also got the appeal of violence. Although MOST rapes AREN’T violent (mine was) when you read a case that ISN’T like that you’re almost disappointed. Violence can also be a huge turn-on.
Now let’s look at other ways in which rape is “special.” You DON’T ask a bank manager if he WANTED to be robbed (unless you’re a cop who thinks he was in on the heist and looking for a piece of the action). You DON’T ask someone who’s been mugged in the street whether they WANTED to be mugged or they really WANTED to hand over their money. You DON’T ask a victim of a violent assault if they WANTED to be beaten up.
Why then do we ask a woman who says she’s been raped if she DID enjoy it, want it, ask for it, contribute to it by her own behaviour, or even INCITE it? Why do we ask these questions about rape and NOT about other types of crime?
The answer IMO is a complex mix of factors. In the first place (I’m quoting British figures here) only 8% of rape claims involve strangers. The other 92% involve husbands, boyfrieneds and friends. It’s more difficult to persuade people (rightly or wrongly) that it WAS rape when there were already clear bonds of mutual AFFECTION between the two parties.
Secondly, there’s IMO an understandable attitude that the woman is trying to evade and sort of responsibility for her actions. Why SHOULD she think she can dress like a slut, talk dirty, get drunk, parade about like a whore and yet NOT take any responsibility for the CONSEQUENCES of her actions if it goes pear-shaped? A girl like that ISN’T a VICTIM of rape IMO; she’s either a slapper who WAS asking for it and got what she REALLY wanted in a guilt-free way or else she was a prick-teaser who tried it on with the wrong bloke and came unstuck.
Let’s be honest here. A heterosexual man and woman are at some point BOTH going to want to have sex, even if NOT with each other. And being a prick-teaser is actually a form of BULLYING by the girl. She’s saying, I know you want me but you can’t have me and I’m gonna rub it in your face that you can’t. Most blokes just ignore that sort of thing but SOME get so mad that they decide to punish the girl for her behaviour by raping her.
What happens in those cases is very similar to what happens when a victim of bullying can’t take any more and snaps. (I speak from experience on that one; after a year of being bullied at school I snapped and nearly killed the bully. It took six kids and three teachers to pull me off of her else I’d have killed her!). Just like a victim of bullying can go over the top and be more violent than the original bully was, so a victim of prick-teasing can snap, go over the top and rape the girl.
So whose fault is it then? It’s obviously the bully’s fault if he or she gets done over by their victim.
In the same way, it’s the fault of the prick-teaser if she does get raped. Without the initial bullying, the victim would never have snapped. Without the prick-teaser, the girl would never have got raped.
If she’d acted decently and not led the bloke on nothing would have happend. Slo, whatever way you look at it, it’s her fault she got raped. She bullied the bloke and he snapped. You could almost look on it as an act of self-defence!
I know a lot of peoople are going to find what I’ve just said (at best) sad, at worst sick and disgusting.
Even as I write these words myself I can hardly believe how they sound.
I’m now going to talk about the cases where it clearly is the case that the woman dressed decently, spoke well, didn’t behave like a tart and wasn’t drunk or high on drugs.
How do we explain them? In the first place, 9 times our of 10 they will be attractive women of child-bearing age and will be far more likely to experience rape as a traumatic experience than older and less attractive women.
I remember one of the elderly victims of a rapist in London being interviewed about her experience (she was in her 80s) and she was actually giggling as she described her rape.
Those cases, though, are a minority of rapes and (for some obscure reason) almost always involve black men. It’s very unusual for a white male to rape an elderly woman. (Not that most blacks do it either, of course!)
Genuine rape cases, to judge from the fact that MOST complaints brought to the police are thrown out after further investigation or else withdrawn by the woman herself), are a tiny proportion or REPORTED rapes.
In 95%of the cases when rape claims DO come to court, the defendant is found NOT GUILTY.
DNA evidence has also exonerated hundreds of men who were WRONGLY convicted by showing that it was IMPOSSIBLE for them to have committed the rape in the first place.
Whatever way you look at it, that means that the MAJORITY of rape accusations are FALSE – either through conscious and deliberate LYING or else through misunderstanding.
Is it worth spending so much time, money, energy and resources into pursuing such a rare crime?
Just playing Devil’s Advocate again LOL!
Source
with one comment
What makes rape different from other crimes? Why is it that we seem to have a greater horror of rape than we do of murder? And is this attitude towards it even rational?
I’ve got a friened whose daughter was murdered. NO sexual activity took place and the guy was eventually caught and sent to prison. She actually said to me that would RATHER her daughter HAD been raped but NOT murdered.
I think that’s a completely RATIONAL attitude. Like me, she thinks her daughter’s murderer OUGHT to have been executed instead of sent to jaia. She also thinks that rape is NOT as serious a crime as murder.
That doesn’t mean that I think it’s a trivial matter. Nor does it mean I don’t CARE about women (or men) who get raped. Christ, I’ve BEEN raped myself so I’m not exactly coaching from the sidelines!
Anywya, let’s look at what it IS that seems to make rape a crime of particular horror to so many people. In the first place, IMO, it’s the voyeur in us. It gives a sort of prurient, salacious “edge” to the crime that you don’t get with most offences. Who gets turned on by reading about a Mafia hitman shooting dead a rival mobster? But when a girl gets raped…
Then there’s the frisson of fear. Reading about a rape gives you that shivering feeling and raises your goose pimples (goose bumps). Fear is a huge sexual turn-on for many people.
Then there’s the feeling of helplessness. The woman lost her power to resist and was forced to submit to the man. That’s a huge turn-on as well for many of us.
You’ve also got the appeal of violence. Although MOST rapes AREN’T violent (mine was) when you read a case that ISN’T like that you’re almost disappointed. Violence can also be a huge turn-on.
Now let’s look at other ways in which rape is “special.” You DON’T ask a bank manager if he WANTED to be robbed (unless you’re a cop who thinks he was in on the heist and looking for a piece of the action). You DON’T ask someone who’s been mugged in the street whether they WANTED to be mugged or they really WANTED to hand over their money. You DON’T ask a victim of a violent assault if they WANTED to be beaten up.
Why then do we ask a woman who says she’s been raped if she DID enjoy it, want it, ask for it, contribute to it by her own behaviour, or even INCITE it? Why do we ask these questions about rape and NOT about other types of crime?
The answer IMO is a complex mix of factors. In the first place (I’m quoting British figures here) only 8% of rape claims involve strangers. The other 92% involve husbands, boyfrieneds and friends. It’s more difficult to persuade people (rightly or wrongly) that it WAS rape when there were already clear bonds of mutual AFFECTION between the two parties.
Secondly, there’s IMO an understandable attitude that the woman is trying to evade and sort of responsibility for her actions. Why SHOULD she think she can dress like a slut, talk dirty, get drunk, parade about like a whore and yet NOT take any responsibility for the CONSEQUENCES of her actions if it goes pear-shaped? A girl like that ISN’T a VICTIM of rape IMO; she’s either a slapper who WAS asking for it and got what she REALLY wanted in a guilt-free way or else she was a prick-teaser who tried it on with the wrong bloke and came unstuck.
Let’s be honest here. A heterosexual man and woman are at some point BOTH going to want to have sex, even if NOT with each other. And being a prick-teaser is actually a form of BULLYING by the girl. She’s saying, I know you want me but you can’t have me and I’m gonna rub it in your face that you can’t. Most blokes just ignore that sort of thing but SOME get so mad that they decide to punish the girl for her behaviour by raping her.
What happens in those cases is very similar to what happens when a victim of bullying can’t take any more and snaps. (I speak from experience on that one; after a year of being bullied at school I snapped and nearly killed the bully. It took six kids and three teachers to pull me off of her else I’d have killed her!). Just like a victim of bullying can go over the top and be more violent than the original bully was, so a victim of prick-teasing can snap, go over the top and rape the girl.
So whose fault is it then? It’s obviously the bully’s fault if he or she gets done over by their victim.
In the same way, it’s the fault of the prick-teaser if she does get raped. Without the initial bullying, the victim would never have snapped. Without the prick-teaser, the girl would never have got raped.
If she’d acted decently and not led the bloke on nothing would have happend. Slo, whatever way you look at it, it’s her fault she got raped. She bullied the bloke and he snapped. You could almost look on it as an act of self-defence!
I know a lot of peoople are going to find what I’ve just said (at best) sad, at worst sick and disgusting.
Even as I write these words myself I can hardly believe how they sound.
I’m now going to talk about the cases where it clearly is the case that the woman dressed decently, spoke well, didn’t behave like a tart and wasn’t drunk or high on drugs.
How do we explain them? In the first place, 9 times our of 10 they will be attractive women of child-bearing age and will be far more likely to experience rape as a traumatic experience than older and less attractive women.
I remember one of the elderly victims of a rapist in London being interviewed about her experience (she was in her 80s) and she was actually giggling as she described her rape.
Those cases, though, are a minority of rapes and (for some obscure reason) almost always involve black men. It’s very unusual for a white male to rape an elderly woman. (Not that most blacks do it either, of course!)
Genuine rape cases, to judge from the fact that MOST complaints brought to the police are thrown out after further investigation or else withdrawn by the woman herself), are a tiny proportion or REPORTED rapes.
In 95%of the cases when rape claims DO come to court, the defendant is found NOT GUILTY.
DNA evidence has also exonerated hundreds of men who were WRONGLY convicted by showing that it was IMPOSSIBLE for them to have committed the rape in the first place.
Whatever way you look at it, that means that the MAJORITY of rape accusations are FALSE – either through conscious and deliberate LYING or else through misunderstanding.
Is it worth spending so much time, money, energy and resources into pursuing such a rare crime?
Just playing Devil’s Advocate again LOL!
Source
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)