15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college

[Loren Pechtel]

We've seen some on here before who admit the point of the questions is to find such cases.

Unless those people are the ones who did this study, that doesn't make the point any less valid. They didn't provide enough information about the subject they were studying to make any conclusions from it worthwhile. Saying that it shows inflated numbers is as invalid as saying it shows accurate numbers.

You can't use this study to draw any conclusions other than that it is a way to not publish a study.

That's what I meant--those doing the study.

- - - Updated - - -

But why would they admit it on the surveys looking for high rape numbers and not admit it on the crime victimization survey??

Are you under the impression that 1) the same people are surveyed, and 2) the surveys of these same people are done at the same time?

Same people shouldn't matter if they're doing the survey right.

The crime victimization survey is done repeatedly although I don't know the interval.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

"The same people" do not need to be surveyed in order to compare results on two different surveys, if each of them has sampled the same population without bias. This is how we're able to get time series data without using longitudinal surveys.

If the population you want to make conclusions about is 'all women in America', say, crime victimisation surveys with a stratified national sample are far better than college surveys with convenience samples. Even if your population of interest were 'college age women', then I'd still trust a crime victimisation survey more. Even if your sample was 'college age women enrolled in college' I would still trust the crime victimisation survey more (if, of course, it had the necessary demographic information collected).

Convenience samples are not necessarily useless; any correlation you find between two variables is still likely to be correlated in the wider population, but they are dreadful for any kind of 'overall prevalence' statistic.

Perhaps you could explain how this relates to the question "But why would they admit it on the surveys looking for high rape numbers and not admit it on the crime victimization survey??"

Perhaps you could pay attention to the context. What he was replying to was:

Are you under the impression that 1) the same people are surveyed

 

[Loren Pechtel]

It's the same pattern we see over and over--the idea that choices shouldn't have bad consequences. If the world is a good place a person should never have to choose between two evils. Thus if faced with such a choice the other guy must be in the wrong.

You either believe that your point of view is reasonable and likely shared by others or you believe you are crazy and no one shares your view.
If you don't think that you are uniquely crazy, then this point of view you are describing that is shared by others is exactly the problem with the study. The study did not seem to query about rape, but about if the world is that "good place" you wish it to be.

It's not a matter of what people believe, but rather how they act.

 

[laughing dog]

Same people shouldn't matter if they're doing the survey right.

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

 

[Metaphor]

Except, you did not. A survey designed to address the experiences of first year college students is much more likely to give better results than a general survey under the assumption that both surveys are done in an appropriate manner.

But the whole point is that a convenience sample isn't an 'appropriate manner'.

 

[Metaphor]

Same people shouldn't matter if they're doing the survey right.

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

The question makes sense whether the people are the same or not.

 

[Metaphor]

This may be true in general but it is not universally true.

Yes, but any statement about groups is almost always about group averages, and of course there is individual variation within groups.

When I say men are taller than women, I don't mean every man is taller than every woman, or that within every heterosexual couple, the man is taller than the woman.

I think you would be surprised at how mistaken you are about the number of men in a relationship determining the amount of sex in the relationship. That's pretty individual. It is often an age related issue and related to the number of children in the picture, hours worked, sharing of household duties, length of relationship, etc.

No complex interactive phenomenon (like consensual sex) is determined by a single variable; I didn't mean to imply so.

Sex is also about power, and money, something that men typically have more of in a society. That's part of it. The other is that men can have sex more free from negative consequences than can women. It's a bit of a chicken/egg thing: which comes first? Do men have fewer negative consequences for having multiple sex partners than do women because having multiple sex partners is more biologically programmed for them while women benefit, from a biological/evolutionary sense from having one (or a limited number) of sex partners? I am sure that is true to an extent across the entire gender but it falls apart on an individual basis. Some men are not naturally monogamous. Some women are not.

Wanting more sex in general is not quite the same thing as wanting more sexual partners.

I think society's proscription on promiscuous female behaviour is harmful to girls and women, but men are not the sole perpetrators of this proscription. I knew of many families while I was growing up where the daughters were practically kept in a convent while the sons were free to do whatever they liked. Male parents enforce this but so do female parents.

 

[laughing dog]

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

The question makes sense whether the people are the same or not.

Fine. Do you agree that "Why do different people answer questions differently" is a different question than "Why do the same people answer questions differently", and that the answers to each are probably different?

- - - Updated - - -

Except, you did not. A survey designed to address the experiences of first year college students is much more likely to give better results than a general survey under the assumption that both surveys are done in an appropriate manner.

But the whole point is that a convenience sample isn't an 'appropriate manner'.

Perhaps you could explain why you think this is at all relevant to the discussion.

 

[Metaphor]

Perhaps you could explain why you think this is at all relevant to the discussion.

The heading of this thread claims that 15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college.

A more truthful title would have been '15 percent of a convenience sample of women at one university said they had had sex while incapacitated or unable to consent'.

 

[Toni]

Perhaps you could explain why you think this is at all relevant to the discussion.

The heading of this thread claims that 15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college.

A more truthful title would have been '15 percent of a convenience sample of women at one university said they had had sex while incapacitated or unable to consent'.

Sex while incapacitated or unable to consent is rape.

The study was pretty clear about the limits of the survey sample.

 

[laughing dog]

Perhaps you could explain why you think this is at all relevant to the discussion.

The heading of this thread claims that 15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college.

A more truthful title would have been '15 percent of a convenience sample of women at one university said they had had sex while incapacitated or unable to consent'.

What does any of that have to do with my response to "Why would they respond differently"?

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Same people shouldn't matter if they're doing the survey right.

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

Try taking statistics 101. If the two surveys return results beyond their margin of error apart then one of the surveys is badly done. The crime victimization surveys are considered well done. Thus you're showing the surveys showing the high rape numbers are crap. Thank you for shooting yourself down.

 

[bigfield]

Actually, girls and women are strong enforcers of sexual mores in other girls and women. In some ways, stronger than are men. Only part of that has to do with men, just as how women dress has more to do with how other women perceive them than how men perceive them.

Promiscuous women are a threat to other women. Men are less willing to commit to a single woman if they live in a society were other women are willing to have sex without expecting a commitment. Therefore it is beneficial to women to stigamtise promiscuity.

The problem with that social structure is that it is utterly obsolete: women no longer depend upon men to provide for them and the child, as they provide for themselves and the state provides for them. Therefore there is no longer a competitive advantage in stigmatising promiscuity; only the disadvantages remain.

To some extent, sexual education has to unplug teens from the Matrix that is our prevailing social structures so that they can develop healthy sex lives instead of conforming to structures that are vestiges of more primitive societies. It's a shame that the red pill metaphor from the Matrix (which borrowed from Alice in Wonderland) is strongly associated with Men's Rights activism and the Pickup industry, because it is apt.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

Try taking statistics 101. If the two surveys return results beyond their margin of error apart then one of the surveys is badly done. The crime victimization surveys are considered well done. Thus you're showing the surveys showing the high rape numbers are crap. Thank you for shooting yourself down.

Try taking statistics 201:

Like confidence intervals, the margin of error can be defined for any desired confidence level, but usually a level of 90%, 95% or 99% is chosen (typically 95%). This level is the probability that a margin of error around the reported percentage would include the "true" percentage.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Margin_of_error

Anyway, you're also assuming a number of things like that both surveys define things in the same way.

 

[Toni]

Actually, girls and women are strong enforcers of sexual mores in other girls and women. In some ways, stronger than are men. Only part of that has to do with men, just as how women dress has more to do with how other women perceive them than how men perceive them.

Promiscuous women are a threat to other women. Men are less willing to commit to a single woman if they live in a society were other women are willing to have sex without expecting a commitment. Therefore it is beneficial to women to stigamtise promiscuity.

The problem with that social structure is that it is utterly obsolete: women no longer depend upon men to provide for them and the child, as they provide for themselves and the state provides for them. Therefore there is no longer a competitive advantage in stigmatising promiscuity; only the disadvantages remain.

To some extent, sexual education has to unplug teens from the Matrix that is our prevailing social structures so that they can develop healthy sex lives instead of conforming to structures that are vestiges of more primitive societies. It's a shame that the red pill metaphor from the Matrix (which borrowed from Alice in Wonderland) is strongly associated with Men's Rights activism and the Pickup industry, because it is apt.

Societal behavior and mores are slow to change.

Believe it or not, women are not all competing for men. Not even all straight women.

I would also disagree that women do not need men to help provide for any child. They may be able to support themselves and the child, with or without the help of the state, but that does not render men obsolete, aside from sperm donation.

Aside from that, believe it or not, women also have other reasons for stigmatizing promiscuous sex by other women: it can make men assume that all women are equally available and willing to have sex without any sort of relationship or commitment.

That does not include whether men are valuable as parents, aside from their financial contributions.

Is a society more stable with a secure family at its core? Is a society more prone to disruption and violence and chaos if family structures are absent?

 

[laughing dog]

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

Try taking statistics 101. If the two surveys return results beyond their margin of error apart then one of the surveys is badly done. The crime victimization surveys are considered well done. Thus you're showing the surveys showing the high rape numbers are crap. Thank you for shooting yourself down.

1st, your conclusion implicitly assumes the two surveys surveyed the same populations and are looking to estimate the same population statistic. 2nd, even properly administered surveys will sometimes yield poor estimates because samples are random. For example, a 95% confidence interval means that 95 intervals out of 100 derived from same-sized random samples drawn from the same population will contain the true population parameter. Which means 5 will not. It has nothing to do with survey being crap and everything to do with understanding the very nature of random sampling: something anyone who passed statistics 101 would understand.

When statistical study generates results that conflict with one's preconceptions, that does not automatically mean the study is flawed. A person truly interested in learning about the world would entertain the possibility that his or her preconceptions were in error.

 

[bigfield]

Men's aversion to promiscuous women may be rooted in a primal fear of being cuckolded, a fear that isn't relevant any more, even if one considers paternity fraud. Boys don't have any particular reason to care that girls are having sex, petty jealousy notwithstanding.

Why is paternity fraud not relevant? Men can still be forced to pay child support for kids that are proven to not be biologically theirs. Now when the law allows a challenge to paternity, at any time, requires DNA tests when requested, and their ruling is bound by the results of said tests, then it becomes irrelevant. As long as it's possible for a man to be forced to pay for a kid that isn't his, when he didn't knowingly agree to take care of another man's child, it's at the very least a reasonable concern for men to have.

My bad--I forgot how fucked the legal system is.

 

[bigfield]

Promiscuous women are a threat to other women. Men are less willing to commit to a single woman if they live in a society were other women are willing to have sex without expecting a commitment. Therefore it is beneficial to women to stigamtise promiscuity.

The problem with that social structure is that it is utterly obsolete: women no longer depend upon men to provide for them and the child, as they provide for themselves and the state provides for them. Therefore there is no longer a competitive advantage in stigmatising promiscuity; only the disadvantages remain.

To some extent, sexual education has to unplug teens from the Matrix that is our prevailing social structures so that they can develop healthy sex lives instead of conforming to structures that are vestiges of more primitive societies. It's a shame that the red pill metaphor from the Matrix (which borrowed from Alice in Wonderland) is strongly associated with Men's Rights activism and the Pickup industry, because it is apt.

Societal behavior and mores are slow to change.

Believe it or not, women are not all competing for men. Not even all straight women.

I was speaking in generalities. I can add the #NotAllWomen hashtag if that helps.

I would also disagree that women do not need men to help provide for any child. They may be able to support themselves and the child, with or without the help of the state, but that does not render men obsolete, aside from sperm donation.

The nuclear family is not the only option, or necessarily the best option: children can also be raised communally or in blended family households. Daddy is optional.

Aside from that, believe it or not, women also have other reasons for stigmatizing promiscuous sex by other women: it can make men assume that all women are equally available and willing to have sex without any sort of relationship or commitment.

Since you offered, I don't believe it.

Is a society more stable with a secure family at its core? Is a society more prone to disruption and violence and chaos if family structures are absent?

No to both.

 

[Metaphor]

The heading of this thread claims that 15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college.

A more truthful title would have been '15 percent of a convenience sample of women at one university said they had had sex while incapacitated or unable to consent'.

Sex while incapacitated or unable to consent is rape.

The study was pretty clear about the limits of the survey sample.

I have not said that sex while incapacitated or unable to consent isn't rape.

I have asked how people in the study have assessed whether they were able to consent or not.

For example, people have different perceptions of whether they're too drunk to drive or not (legally speaking). In Australia, someone with a BAC of 0.04 is not too drunk to drive. Someone with a BAC of 0.06 is too drunk to drive.

But we don't measure whether people are too drunk to drive by asking them. We measure their breath alcohol (and then their blood alcohol if the breath alcohol shows likely drunkenness).

 

[Metaphor]

The heading of this thread claims that 15 percent of women are raped while incapacitated during their freshman year at college.

A more truthful title would have been '15 percent of a convenience sample of women at one university said they had had sex while incapacitated or unable to consent'.

What does any of that have to do with my response to "Why would they respond differently"?

You said

Nonsense. You asked why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey. That question only makes sense if the same people are answering both surveys.

I assume by 'that question' you mean

why people would answer questions differently depending on the survey

The above question 'makes sense' whether the 'people' are the same people or not.

If you had two surveys that both randomly sample the Australian population in the same week asking about euthanasia, and one survey shows 50% support and the other survey shows 60% support, it makes perfect sense to ask why people answered the euthanasia question differently, even if not a single person answered both surveys.

(The answer could be a number of things, but most likely would have to do with the framing of the question and the framing of the survey purpose).