This is a rape myth. Many people believe in things of this nature, it doesn't mean we should kill them, it means we need to educate them that "no means no." Rape Myths are commonly held beliefs about how rape occurs.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Maybe you just don't have much experience with courting women, but many men have learned that sometimes they can turn "no's" into "maybe's" and then into "yes's". Read the excellent book Why Men Are the Way The Are by men's movement writer and former NOW board member Warren Farrell to put this into greater context.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
Context, non-verbal communication. Sometimes a woman might say "no" and then change it to "yes" an hour or two later.
WhipperSnapper
Lifer
- Oct 30, 2004
- 11,442
- 32
- 91
I never said or suggested anything like that. All I might have said is that the alleged "peer reviewed" studies might not be all that reliable since the peers doing the review are liable to be Gender Feminists and/or Marxist-Feminists. You then said I had no idea what those terms meant.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
In your dreams maybe.
Truth is that if she says NO, you are legally bound by that no, if you persist you are guilty of rape and that is the way the laws are written.
There is NO question about this and IF she says no, you should never persist, if she says no, you stop, if she wants more she will continue, it's not any harder than that.
If she says no and you persist, you are legally raping her and there isn't a court in the western world that wouldn't convict you for rape for doing so.
Call me crazy but i prefer to have sex with sober women who WANTS TO for many, many hours.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
I have never gone further when a woman has said no, that is not courting, that would be raping.
If she wants to, she won't say no and being persistant after she says no is probably the most retarded fucking thing i have ever have heard of, what good could come of it? You'd talk her into having sex with her? It's still fucking rape you stupid piece of shit.
And now you are saying a work of fiction is the way you live your life by.
Just a fast guess here... You're a virgin.
Don't worry though, you'll get yours and all of the bullshit you have read will not work in the least son.
The numbers I am citing do not come from extrapolating anything from the reported rape rates or crime statistics. Trying to make them work based on the numbers from the types of studies I am talking about is not going to work.
The only contention I am making is that rape rates are a lot higher than you probably think.
As an example article, trying finding this:
Testa, M., Vanzile-Tamsen, C., & Livingston, J. (2004). Assessing women?s experiences of sexual aggression using the sexual experiences survey: evidence for validity and implications for research. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 28, 256-265.
A google search should help you find it.
This is a rape myth. Many people believe in things of this nature, it doesn't mean we should kill them, it means we need to educate them that "no means no." Rape Myths are commonly held beliefs about how rape occurs.
A peer review means that the authors paper has been examined by fellow scientists to verify the hypothesis, sample population, methods, statistical analysis, and conclusions drawn are appropriate. Peer reviewers are, as far as I know, selected randomly by the journal who is approached to publish the article, not by the researcher who wrote it.
- Feb 20, 2005
- 2,158
- 1
- 0
There is no reason to write include "gender" or "Marxist" before feminist unless you are specifically talking about a certain feminist theory.
Neither of these feminist theories are very common; gender feminism in particular was coined by a Libertarian feminist (read: very small minority) to negatively describe other feminists. I have taken multiple Women and Gender Studies courses, and have only come across the term once before. Nobody self-identifies as a "gender feminist."
It is obvious that you are quoting someone else's work, and it is obvious that you do not understand what it means.
JohnOfSheffield
Lifer
- Jun 26, 2007
- 11,925
- 2
- 0
- Feb 20, 2005
- 2,158
- 1
- 0
I don't think "no means no" is the best paradigm for rape prevention. Sex shouldn't be something that you get someone to do with you; it should be mutually desired. The book Yes Means Yes: Visions of Female Sexual Power and A World Without Rape was very insightful in this regard.
Nebor
Lifer
- Jun 24, 2003
- 29,582
- 12
- 76
Yup. And I've never met any SF people who were so loud about what they did (quiet professional, anyone?) That combined with a lot of his firearms "expertise" really call his whole persona into question.
But he totally missed Whippersnapper's point. This is yet another thread where people were having a reasoned discussion and JoS comes in with "FUcking fuck fuckers, listen here son you're a hick and fuckity fuck fuck (insert personal insult here.)" I've accused him of being drunk several times due to exactly this kind behavior. Which begs the question, why is he still here?
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
Really? Looking at abstracts for the book it looks like so much propaganda with very little legitimate thought.
"Yes" and "no" are binary terms. The absence of yes is necessarily no and vice-versa. To any rational person the affirmation that "no means no" is semantically identical to "yes means yes". Rational people understand that "no" has many variations and includes such things as "I'm tired" or "I'd rather not" or "I really just want to get some sleep". I fail to see how the idea that "yes means yes" is anything other than a statement of the obvious that all thinking people have known for decades. The authors have certainly made no new groundbreaking discovery here.
Really? So the fact that it has been proven that the Duke players were falsely accused is irrelevant and the real crime is that the media "commodified" the lying woman's body? Come on. That's just plain ridiculous. Besides, if you're a stripper and a prostitute, you're "commodifying" your own body and don't need the bloody media to do it for you.
Bottom line, from what I can tell the book is a collection of banalities that have been dressed up with pseudo-academic terminology in an attempt to present what are mostly common-sense ideas as something new and revolutionary.
ZV
sactoking
Diamond Member
- Sep 24, 2007
- 7,651
- 2,933
- 136
Yes, I am quite serious. You see, Carmen and I are having a civil discussion about the incidence of rape. You know, how often it occurs. Carmen quoted some numbers that seemed extraordinarily high. The numbers I've found don't corroborate. We've been discussing the true prevalence based on these disparate numbers.
Into that you stepped and started making inflammatory, accusatory, and threatening statements. You don't know what your talking about, you're making yourself look and sound like an idiot, and any cogent point you may have had has been lost in your blustering.
You've made little or no attempt to comprehend the thread before replying. You've brought nothing to the discussion. Please stop.
sactoking
Diamond Member
- Sep 24, 2007
- 7,651
- 2,933
- 136
I freely admit that the method I used to extrapolate is likely very inaccurate. My continued skepticism is based on the fact that the numbers you've quoted don't mesh with the reported statistics and, in all honesty, seem so astronomical as to incite further doubt.
Based on the description of methodologies you gave earlier, your numbers aren't extrapolated from crime statistics, but they ARE extrapolated numbers. Surveys were given and numerical results were averaged and extrapolated, then regressed from the sample to the population.
As a result, we have two data sets that are statistically significant. One data set says "We know how often it's reported and we know how many times it was reported." The other data set says "We went to the source and got answers from the people likely to be affected." The difference is that (with two statistically significant samples) you have results that are off by a factor of ~240.
Somewhere there has to be another variable in play. It's quite likely that there's another variable in the "official" statistics, something other than rate and occurrence that explain the underreporting. I have no idea what that might be. It's also quite likely that there's a problem with the methodology used in the other surveys. There's the possibility that the structure of the surveys given are flawed to the point that they fundamentally over report the incidence.
I'm not a great statistician. I don't have much field survey work. But I do know that from a psychological standpoint it's VERY difficult to create some sort of survey sample that does not bias the results in some way. It's so difficult that academics and business people have been struggling with it for decades.
I'm also not foolish enough to believe that the "official" statistics are adequate to encompass all incidents. My gut feeling is that the true number lies somewhere in between. I honestly cannot fathom 24-33% as being accurate, but I also doubt 1-2% is as well.
Just a bit of personal experience, but some women really do say no when they don't mean it. I don't want to relate any personal details, but I have actually had the conversation about her saying no when she doesn't mean no. It is strange for me, because I have been brought up to firmly believe in the "no means no" rule, and when they say no, for me that means it is over, while for her it is part of the excitement. I have also been told that one way to seduce them was to be persistent and forceful, but there were limits, and they were discussed before hand, but I understand where some people could get the idea that some persistence was normal.
This causes some concern for me, because I think rape is one of the worst crimes commited, probaby only less than a torture/murder. But what one woman considers the most exciting time ever, another could consider a horrible experience, and if you spend time with a few women from group A, and then meet a woman from group B, you may not realize that group B actually means what they say.
I am interested in how the data for this 1/3 to 14th statistic was generated? I don't have time to read any of the linked studies over lunch, but I will take a look later. It sounds like you include women who consented only because they were drunk or otherwise under the influence, as well as men using forms of coercion regarding a relationship?
How do you classify a situation in which two people are drunk, neither would normally consent, are they both victims and rapists? What if just one party is intoxicated, is the intoxicated one a rape victim even if they consented, and actively participated, for example the woman is very drunk, but she is the one who climbs on him? This seems to me to be a very strange break from the normal treatment of drunken behavior. Normally when a person voluntarily inebriates themself, they are responsible for all their own actions while under the influence because they chose to become intoxicated. I am not including anything such as date rape drugs where the victim is not aware of the substance, but only voluntary consumption. I also am concerned that from what I have heard so far it sounds like men are being un-fairly blamed in these situations. If a woman cannot give consent while she is drunk, and sex she has while drunk is considered rape, why do we not give the exact same consideration for men? From my experience most of the time people engage in sex while drunk, both parties are intoxicated. If both parties are intoxicated are the men considered to be a rapist, while the woman is a victim even though they both were intoxicated and both were willing participants while under the effects of the substance?
I apologize if I have made any unfair inferences here, but I do not have much time to study this thread over lunch, so I am just kind of shotgunning my questions out there. I will take some time to read this over more carefully later, and to read the studies.
Lets not forget, that the Hospitals are private organisations and bill for their services, someone is going to pay for the service.
Also, in Texas a delinquint medical bill will not negatively affect your credit.
- Feb 20, 2005
- 2,158
- 1
- 0
Did you read WhipperSnapper's post to the effect of "No Means Yes?" There is a common narrative which says that men can convince women to have sex with them, after they are turned down. And this often works, not because the women were convinced and became attracted to the men, but because of an implicit physical and emotional threat, and the women's desire to "get it over with." She agrees to sex so he'll leave. I would not consider this a healthy sexual relationship; as long as sex is something women can be convinced of, not something they desire of their own accord, they are disempowered.
There is another narrative which commodifies sex, and makes relationships transactional. A man takes a woman out to dinner, and there is an expectation, on one or both parties that the woman "repays" him with sex. I would not consider this a healthy sexual relationship; the sex is seen as for the man's benefit (and the meal is for the woman). When sex is a gift to men, female sexual desire is erased; this is disempowering.
Yes Means Yes means having sex with people who want it, not people who you have "convinced" (read: coerced), or people who owe you. If you see repression of female sexual desire in society, like I do, and like people (read: rapists) who tout "No Means Yes" do, then you should agree that female sexual empowerment is important.
I doubt you would agree with any critical race theory, so I'll just leave that. However, the sexual assault of sex workers (I'm not speaking of the Duke Lacrosse case in particular) is very common, yet largely ignored by society. They are commonly considered unrapeable, and this bias prevents us from applying justice for those who really need it.
Sactoking,
The results do come from % of respondents who partake in the research and answer in a certain way. You are right that it is very difficult to create an accurate sample population, but there are numerous statistical analysis you can perform to verify that your sample is representative of the population you are studying at large. Such a practice is fairly typical, because due to any number of reasons it is impossible to survey everyone. We tend to look at gender, age, education level, race, and whatever other relevant participant factors are needed to determine if the sample differs significantly from the population at large. In the study I participated in, we looked at college students.
Now, I agree, if one study comes up with a 25-33% number (note this includes *attempted* rape as well, not just completed rape) that would seem very high. I was extremely skeptical of this percentage myself. However, the number is fairly consistent. I read probably 30 different research articles, all from different authors, with different methodology, different populations (college, military, civilian, minorities, ect), and the percentages are fairly consistent. We're also dealing with a lifetime prevalence rate, obviously the older you are the more likely you are to experience this situation, though college age women seem to be the most at risk (well, behind the military). Since almost every study finds about 1/4 of the women answer in the affirmative, it seems pretty scientifically conclusive at this point.
In general, if your statistical analysis reveal a less than 5% chance that your results are due to random chance (i.e., what you found was just due to random luck), then we consider it statistically significant.
Researcher's don't just try to replicate others findings. Some do, because repeatable results are important, but it's also important to be skeptical of research findings. Whenever you design a study you are asking why they found something, and trying to change your study to in a way that might explain if one of those alternate variables you mentioned affected in. My study looked at the attractiveness of the victim and perpetrator to see if that influenced third party beliefs about whether raped occurred (ex: if you have a highly attractive perpetrator and a non-attractive victim, is the rape seen as more acceptable?) We get attractiveness data by basically conducting a whole separate study with different participants.
daishi5,
There are definitely a lot of problems with "no means no," however I was using it as a general phrase
As I understand the law, if one person is drunk and the other is not, consent cannot be obtained. One of the more interesting scenarios you get into is what if both of the individuals are mentality handicapped in some way (i.e., lower than normal IQs). Can they consent to have sex with each other? For the situation you described where both people are drunk, I do not know how the law would apply. For one, there are varying levels of drunkenness. I've had sex with my wife when she was "tipsy" and I was sober, I don't think that makes me a rapist. There are just to many additional circumstances that may be involved.
Understand when we conduct this research we do not ask questions like "Were you raped," Google the Sexual Experiences Survey and you will get an idea of how the research is conducted. We tend to look at what we term "sexual victimization," here's an excerpt from a paper I wrote:
"Sexual victimization includes unwanted sexual contact (i.e. fondling), attempted rape (i.e. non-penetrating), and unwanted sex (i.e. oral, vaginal, or anal intercourse). Studies conducted on sexual victimization often find that 30-40% of all female college students have experienced at least one episode during their lifetime (Himelein, 1995; Tetsa, VanZile-Tamsen, & Livingston, 2004). "
There is a continuum, obviously unwanted contact is less serious than attempted or completed rape, yet there seems to be quite a bit of evidence that the a large amount of woman have a pretty bad experience with their bodily integrity at some point.
I do agree that there is a stereotype against male victims. They are not taken seriously, because in our society is not "normal" for a man to refuse sex. Male rape victims have it particularly hard, in part because, for lack of a better way to phrase this, having an erection isn't always directly under your direct control.
I also sympathize with men who are victims of false accusations, because not only does it make the male falsely accused look bad, it weakens the position of those who actually are victims.
The results do come from % of respondents who partake in the research and answer in a certain way. You are right that it is very difficult to create an accurate sample population, but there are numerous statistical analysis you can perform to verify that your sample is representative of the population you are studying at large. Such a practice is fairly typical, because due to any number of reasons it is impossible to survey everyone. We tend to look at gender, age, education level, race, and whatever other relevant participant factors are needed to determine if the sample differs significantly from the population at large. In the study I participated in, we looked at college students.
Now, I agree, if one study comes up with a 25-33% number (note this includes *attempted* rape as well, not just completed rape) that would seem very high. I was extremely skeptical of this percentage myself. However, the number is fairly consistent. I read probably 30 different research articles, all from different authors, with different methodology, different populations (college, military, civilian, minorities, ect), and the percentages are fairly consistent. We're also dealing with a lifetime prevalence rate, obviously the older you are the more likely you are to experience this situation, though college age women seem to be the most at risk (well, behind the military). Since almost every study finds about 1/4 of the women answer in the affirmative, it seems pretty scientifically conclusive at this point.
In general, if your statistical analysis reveal a less than 5% chance that your results are due to random chance (i.e., what you found was just due to random luck), then we consider it statistically significant.
Researcher's don't just try to replicate others findings. Some do, because repeatable results are important, but it's also important to be skeptical of research findings. Whenever you design a study you are asking why they found something, and trying to change your study to in a way that might explain if one of those alternate variables you mentioned affected in. My study looked at the attractiveness of the victim and perpetrator to see if that influenced third party beliefs about whether raped occurred (ex: if you have a highly attractive perpetrator and a non-attractive victim, is the rape seen as more acceptable?) We get attractiveness data by basically conducting a whole separate study with different participants.
daishi5,
There are definitely a lot of problems with "no means no," however I was using it as a general phrase
As I understand the law, if one person is drunk and the other is not, consent cannot be obtained. One of the more interesting scenarios you get into is what if both of the individuals are mentality handicapped in some way (i.e., lower than normal IQs). Can they consent to have sex with each other? For the situation you described where both people are drunk, I do not know how the law would apply. For one, there are varying levels of drunkenness. I've had sex with my wife when she was "tipsy" and I was sober, I don't think that makes me a rapist. There are just to many additional circumstances that may be involved. Understand when we conduct this research we do not ask questions like "Were you raped," Google the Sexual Experiences Survey and you will get an idea of how the research is conducted. We tend to look at what we term "sexual victimization," here's an excerpt from a paper I wrote:
"Sexual victimization includes unwanted sexual contact (i.e. fondling), attempted rape (i.e. non-penetrating), and unwanted sex (i.e. oral, vaginal, or anal intercourse). Studies conducted on sexual victimization often find that 30-40% of all female college students have experienced at least one episode during their lifetime (Himelein, 1995; Tetsa, VanZile-Tamsen, & Livingston, 2004). "
There is a continuum, obviously unwanted contact is less serious than attempted or completed rape, yet there seems to be quite a bit of evidence that the a large amount of woman have a pretty bad experience with their bodily integrity at some point.
I do agree that there is a stereotype against male victims. They are not taken seriously, because in our society is not "normal" for a man to refuse sex. Male rape victims have it particularly hard, in part because, for lack of a better way to phrase this, having an erection isn't always directly under your direct control.
I also sympathize with men who are victims of false accusations, because not only does it make the male falsely accused look bad, it weakens the position of those who actually are victims.
Zenmervolt
Elite member
- Oct 22, 2000
- 24,514
- 44
- 91
So I was raped (or at least "disempowered") on the occasions when a woman had to convince me to engage in intercourse after I initially declined? Ridiculous.
There has to be intelligent analysis of the specific situation.
Yes, the situations you describe in which a person (it needn't be a woman) agrees to sex merely to "get it over with" are situations in which the relationship is unhealthy. Those situations, however, are clearly covered when I said the following:
Nothing you have said so far offers any evidence to suggest that you are positing any new or groundbreaking theory. You are only further establishing the fact that the concepts are common-sense guidelines that any rational person already understands.
Again, how is this new or revolutionary? No rational or intelligent man today believes that buying a woman dinner (or anything else) entitles him to anything.
That's a common-sense understanding of how to value another individual and is neither new nor groundbreaking. Any gentleman can tell you this.
Ahh, yes. If I don't agree with you, it must be because I am unenlightened and ignorant of the plight of women. It certainly can't have anything to do with the fact that I detest pseudo-academic drivel that attempts to gain notoriety by repackaging common sense ideas.
The double standards (e.g. promiscuous men are admired, promiscuous women are disparaged) that exist in some sections of society are patently absurd and I fully agree with those who are attempting to eradicate such hypocrisy. I agree that it's insane the way female sensuality is suppressed in certain subcultures.
As for myself, I have dated virgins (who remained virgins, in every sense, even after our relationship) and I have dated women whose partnerings numbered well into the triple digits (and joyfully allowed those women to add me as another notch on their bedposts before they moved on). I really don't care what a woman's history is as long as I find her intellectually interesting to be with; sexual activity is no precondition for a relationship in my mind. It is always the individual who is interesting, sex is simply an enjoyable activity that may or may not be presented as an option.
That depends entirely upon whether that theory attempts to lump all members of an "oppressor" race into the same homogeneous mold. I am sympathetic to the idea that we are all molded to some extent by society, but at the same time I resent, as I am certain members of other races likewise resent, being presumed to act a certain way simply because of an accident of birth.
In general, I agree with you. It is, frankly, shameful how prostitutes are treated by society, especially in regards to the perception that it's not possible to rape a prostitute (a perception which shows a disgusting lack of recognition of a prostitute's humanity). However, I resent the use of the Duke Lacrosse case as an exemplar (in the book, I know you are not using it now) because it's a scenario in which it has been proven that the defendants were falsely accused.
I also don't see how it's possible to work as a stripper or prostitute without commodifying one's body, regardless of race. A stripper sells his or her visual image which, in order to be sold, must necessarily become a commodity, that is, a thing with economic value to the purchaser. A prostitute sells the physical act of sexual intercourse, something that is necessarily inextricable from his or her physical body, and therefore his or her physical body again must necessarily become a commodity. Now, a good prostitute may well sell more than just the physical act of sexual intercourse, but to deny that the commodification of his or her body is a necessary part of his or her job is to deny reality.
This commodification does not negate the prostitute's innate humanity, though I admit that there do exist people who allow the commodification to entirely overshadow the prostitute's humanity. I agree that people who allow such overshadowings are shameful.
Still, we come back to my initial argument: the book is a collection of banalities that have been dressed up with pseudo-academic terminology in an attempt to present what are mostly common-sense ideas as something new and revolutionary.
ZV
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 24K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
-
Facebook
Twitter