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

[Toni]

Do you have some evidence for all of these assertions?

Yes, your post history of exaggerated issues. Human nature to want to 'convince' people of your particular 'way'. the innate human ability to lie and get away with it.

I'm not accusing you of being anything but a normal human... but this is some evidence that people exaggerate to convince. It is as common as the 'white lie'.

How often do you look in a mirror?

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Do you have some evidence for all of these assertions?

Yes, your post history of exaggerated issues. Human nature to want to 'convince' people of your particular 'way'. the innate human ability to lie and get away with it.

I'm not accusing you of being anything but a normal human... but this is some evidence that people exaggerate to convince. It is as common as the 'white lie'.

If Person X needs to establish evidence for Position Y, ad hominems against Person Z who bears no or little relation to Position Y, do not count as an argument for Position Y.

 

[Malintent]

Yes, your post history of exaggerated issues. Human nature to want to 'convince' people of your particular 'way'. the innate human ability to lie and get away with it.

I'm not accusing you of being anything but a normal human... but this is some evidence that people exaggerate to convince. It is as common as the 'white lie'.

If Person X needs to establish evidence for Position Y, ad hominems against Person Z who bears no or little relation to Position Y, do not count as an argument for Position Y.

I suppose you think you are person Z? you have no relation to human nature (position Y)?

 

[ronburgundy]

Given similar prior "research", odds are extremely high that few of these women said they were "raped" while "incapacitated", and these are just the author's unscientific efforts to put words in these women's mouths against their will. What these 15% probably said is that they had sex while intoxicated.

Here is the most informative part of what was quoted.

[P] Researchers found that freshmen women who'd been victims of such assaults before college were at substantial risk of being victimized again. Overall, nearly 18 percent of students said they'd been raped while incapacitated before college, and 41 percent of those young women were raped again while incapacitated during their freshman year.[/P]

So, if you do the algebra to solve for the % "raped" in college who were not "raped" before college, the equation is .41(.18) + X(.82) = .15.
X = .093. This means that the probability of getting "raped" as a freshmen were 9% if you weren't "raped" previously but 41% (over 4.5 times as high) if you were "raped" previously.

Wow. That's an amazing coincidence that the women that got "raped" before college are almost 5 times more likely to get raped again, even though they are in a whole different setting, different city, and around different people. What major causal determinant of such "rape" is the same across these scenarios that could so strongly determine which freshman get "raped" and which do not? The answer lies in the saying "Wherever you go, there you are."

No, this doesn't mean women are the cause of actual rape. This study didn't measure actual rape. The study measured which women gave a response that the researchers categorized as being "raped while incapacitated from drug use or alcohol".

Odds are also great that general drug/alcohol use and number of sexual partners are strong predictors of these "rape" incidents both pre and during college. This is because if rape is defined as a co-occurrence of drug use and sex, then anyone who does either or both more frequently will inherently be more likely to have them co-occur and thus be "raped".

Since young ladies who often get incapacitated from getting drunk will have a higher frequency of getting raped while incapacitated, you don't seem to be saying anything informative.

No, it is the OP and this research that says nothing informative about actual rape.

Being almost 5 times as likely to have this experience in college if you already had it prior to college cannot be accounted for simply by getting drunk more often, especially given how prevalent drinking is among non-rape victims too . As my follow-up post showed, the research showed that these women not only drink more and have sex more but they do both together more precisely because they think drinking makes sex better and more likely. These facts make the only plausible explanation for the 5 times difference due to a similar past experience being that many of this incidents were not rape but rather incidents where the women consented to sex and got drunk with the aim of it facilitating that act. Given the ambiguity of the term "incapacitated" and how such words are generally used liberally (not the political sense) when they don't apply, this makes it highly likely that many of the "yes" responses were from these women who post-hoc view the word as applying to their non-rape experience. Again, other research discussed on this board has shown that a large % of women categorized as being "raped" by researchers using these kinds of questions reject the claim that they were raped or that any wrongdoing occurred.

Bottom line is that neither the OP research nor anyone here has come close to meeting the burden of evidence that the women willing to reply "yes" to this question were actually legally incapacitated during the sex act, did not want the sex to occur, or view the act themselves as rape or any kind of crime. It is probable that % would qualify, but also highly probable that the % is notably lower than the 15% claimed by the OP.

 

[laughing dog]

No, it is the OP and this research that says nothing informative about actual rape.

I suppose it would mean how one defines "actual rape".

 

[Tom Sawyer]

No, it is the OP and this research that says nothing informative about actual rape.

I suppose it would mean how one defines "actual rape".

Yes, it does. Definitions are important in scientific research papers and any which do not include them are poor research papers that don't provide any information on the subject matter being researched.

 

[laughing dog]

I suppose it would mean how one defines "actual rape".

Yes, it does. Definitions are important in scientific research papers and any which do not include them are poor research papers that don't provide any information on the subject matter being researched.

Did this paper leave the terms undefined or "ill-defined" or defined in a fashion you don't like?

 

[Toni]

Yes, it does. Definitions are important in scientific research papers and any which do not include them are poor research papers that don't provide any information on the subject matter being researched.

Did this paper leave the terms undefined or "ill-defined" or defined in a fashion you don't like?

I suppose that would mean actually reading the paper instead of the article ABOUT the paper.

I understand that is too much trouble for some people because it would take time away from them posting about how flawed the paper is.

 

[Don2 (Don1 Revised)]

Since young ladies who often get incapacitated from getting drunk will have a higher frequency of getting raped while incapacitated, you don't seem to be saying anything informative.

No, it is the OP and this research that says nothing informative about actual rape.

Being almost 5 times as likely to have this experience in college if you already had it prior to college cannot be accounted for simply by getting drunk more often, especially given how prevalent drinking is among non-rape victims too . As my follow-up post showed, the research showed that these women not only drink more and have sex more but they do both together more precisely because they think drinking makes sex better and more likely. These facts make the only plausible explanation for the 5 times difference due to a similar past experience being that many of this incidents were not rape but rather incidents where the women consented to sex and got drunk with the aim of it facilitating that act. Given the ambiguity of the term "incapacitated" and how such words are generally used liberally (not the political sense) when they don't apply, this makes it highly likely that many of the "yes" responses were from these women who post-hoc view the word as applying to their non-rape experience. Again, other research discussed on this board has shown that a large % of women categorized as being "raped" by researchers using these kinds of questions reject the claim that they were raped or that any wrongdoing occurred.

Bottom line is that neither the OP research nor anyone here has come close to meeting the burden of evidence that the women willing to reply "yes" to this question were actually legally incapacitated during the sex act, did not want the sex to occur, or view the act themselves as rape or any kind of crime. It is probable that % would qualify, but also highly probable that the % is notably lower than the 15% claimed by the OP.

I don't think "incapacitated" is as ambiguous as you are letting on.

 

[Malintent]

I don't think 'incapacitated' is the word in question. It is the word 'unwanted' that is problematic.

If you go to a store and ask for a bottle of poison, then take that poison home and decide you don't really want poison after all, did the store clerk poison you? According to the logic in the definition used to describe rape, that would have been a poisoning.

 

[Toni]

I don't think 'incapacitated' is the word in question. It is the word 'unwanted' that is problematic.

If you go to a store and ask for a bottle of poison, then take that poison home and decide you don't really want poison after all, did the store clerk poison you? According to the logic in the definition used to describe rape, that would have been a poisoning.

No, but I can see how saying that would let you pretend to feel better.

Look, I've watched drunk college aged guys try very hard to pick up girls who were very nicely, politely turning them down and then being escorted away from the obnoxious drunk guys hitting on them by sober or less drunk or at least less obnoxious guys who could clearly see that the girls were not interested. But the drunk guys remained unconvinced that those girls didn't 'want' them. Loudly insisted that the girls wanted them. Had to be prevented by others from pursuing the girls who left the party because of the obnoxious drunk guys.

Drunk people are not always very good at being able to determine their own level of drunkenness, impairment, capacity, etc. They still are quite able to force themselves upon other people who are not interested in their attentions. Sometimes, this includes sexual assault.

Drunk people are also pretty often ineffective at standing up for themselves, assessing a potentially dangerous or unwanted situation, or fending off an unwanted kiss--or unwanted sexual assault.

Drunk people are not allowed to legally drive automobiles or motorcycles. If they sign contracts or marry while inebriated, the contracts can be voided if challenged because the law recognizes that they are not capable of making decisions or effectively advocating for themselves.

I've seen drunk guys attempt to force themselves sexually upon girls who were drunker--to the point of being unable to stand or understand what was happening. I've seen sober guys attempt to force themselves upon drunk girls. I've heard a lot of girls try to diminish the impact of being sexually assaulted while they were so drunk they were passed out--they-the girl--'shouldn't have been so dumb.' I lost the friendship of a guy I had really liked after he told me that he pushed a girl into having sex although she told him no, repeatedly. He didn't think he did anything wrong.

What I haven't seen or heard is a girl --or a guy--claim to be raped after mutually consented sex, even if one or both was drunk. I am sure that happens but not

 

[Shadowy Man]

In college I watched the behavior of drunk people and the behavior of high people. It's truly a wonder that marijuana is illegal while alcohol is not.

 

[prideandfall]

What I haven't seen or heard is a girl --or a guy--claim to be raped after mutually consented sex, even if one or both was drunk. I am sure that happens but not

i have.

or to be fair, i have seen and heard at least two different women i know just in the last 5 years who basically have this weird sexual Hulkism - the drunker they get, the hornier they get - to the point where sufficiently inebriated they'll fuck anything in the general vicinity of them.
however, they also have self-respect when sober and a refusal to accept that they become sexually aggressive when sufficiently intoxicated.
so there have been incidents in the last year where they got shit-faced, started dry-humping the first thing with a penis that wandered in front of them, had no recollection of this happening, and then after being told about it the next day by other people at the party freaked out about having been molested and nearly raped.

i am absolutely NOT saying this is typical or saying that it anecdotally nullifies sexual assault in any given circumstance, i mention it only to provide an example that you said you had never heard of.

 

[ronburgundy]

What I haven't seen or heard is a girl --or a guy--claim to be raped after mutually consented sex, even if one or both was drunk. I am sure that happens but not

The problem is that the OP study and others like it, don't actually show that a single one of the women who the researchers label as "raped' ever say that they were raped. And a similar study discussed previously on this board, asked a follow-up question specifically about whether the women thought they were "raped" and most said "no"

 

[ronburgundy]

No, it is the OP and this research that says nothing informative about actual rape.

Being almost 5 times as likely to have this experience in college if you already had it prior to college cannot be accounted for simply by getting drunk more often, especially given how prevalent drinking is among non-rape victims too . As my follow-up post showed, the research showed that these women not only drink more and have sex more but they do both together more precisely because they think drinking makes sex better and more likely. These facts make the only plausible explanation for the 5 times difference due to a similar past experience being that many of this incidents were not rape but rather incidents where the women consented to sex and got drunk with the aim of it facilitating that act. Given the ambiguity of the term "incapacitated" and how such words are generally used liberally (not the political sense) when they don't apply, this makes it highly likely that many of the "yes" responses were from these women who post-hoc view the word as applying to their non-rape experience. Again, other research discussed on this board has shown that a large % of women categorized as being "raped" by researchers using these kinds of questions reject the claim that they were raped or that any wrongdoing occurred.

Bottom line is that neither the OP research nor anyone here has come close to meeting the burden of evidence that the women willing to reply "yes" to this question were actually legally incapacitated during the sex act, did not want the sex to occur, or view the act themselves as rape or any kind of crime. It is probable that % would qualify, but also highly probable that the % is notably lower than the 15% claimed by the OP.

I don't think "incapacitated" is as ambiguous as you are letting on.

A mountain of research on survey methodology shows that words that are far more concrete seeming than "incapacitated" are extremely ambiguous, interpreted many ways, and this greatly determines the results. People have varied interpretations of objective things like "How many rooms are in your house?" and "Do you use drugs?", let alone trying to assess their error-prone recollection of a purely subjective state and whether it is minimally sufficient to count as "incapacitated". It is highly likely that a significant % of respondents would include levels of intoxication under that category that fall well short of even the least defensible "too drunk to consent" laws. Note that if just 10% of respondents thought mere legal intoxication sufficient for DUI purposes was included, then that could account for the majority of "yes" responses to the question. And being slightly above 0.08% abv is not incapacitated in any sense intended to qualify as legal "rape".

I don't think 'incapacitated' is the word in question. It is the word 'unwanted' that is problematic.

They are both problematic, and the complex logical structure of the question overall is problematic. The question uses multiple logical conjunctives and disjunctives. Research shows that significant % of responders fail to understand such questions and the conditions required for an affirmative response. Their bias is to respond affirmatively if they think any part of the question applies. IOW, the sex doesn't need to be "unwanted", regardless of what they interpret that to mean. The mere fact that they were "incapacitated by alcohol" (which can mean mild intoxication to some) would produce a "yes" response. I use this as an demonstration in my research methods courses. Ask a 2-part conjunctive question, then separate the 2 issues into 2 separate questions. The number of people who say "yes" to the conjunctive question is always higher than the number of people who then said "yes" to both of the requirements separately.

 

[Malintent]

I don't think 'incapacitated' is the word in question. It is the word 'unwanted' that is problematic.

If you go to a store and ask for a bottle of poison, then take that poison home and decide you don't really want poison after all, did the store clerk poison you? According to the logic in the definition used to describe rape, that would have been a poisoning.

No, but I can see how saying that would let you pretend to feel better.

Look, I've watched drunk college aged guys try very hard to pick up girls who were very nicely, politely turning them down and then being escorted away from the obnoxious drunk guys hitting on them by sober or less drunk or at least less obnoxious guys who could clearly see that the girls were not interested. But the drunk guys remained unconvinced that those girls didn't 'want' them. Loudly insisted that the girls wanted them. Had to be prevented by others from pursuing the girls who left the party because of the obnoxious drunk guys.

Drunk people are not always very good at being able to determine their own level of drunkenness, impairment, capacity, etc. They still are quite able to force themselves upon other people who are not interested in their attentions. Sometimes, this includes sexual assault.

Drunk people are also pretty often ineffective at standing up for themselves, assessing a potentially dangerous or unwanted situation, or fending off an unwanted kiss--or unwanted sexual assault.

Drunk people are not allowed to legally drive automobiles or motorcycles. If they sign contracts or marry while inebriated, the contracts can be voided if challenged because the law recognizes that they are not capable of making decisions or effectively advocating for themselves.

I've seen drunk guys attempt to force themselves sexually upon girls who were drunker--to the point of being unable to stand or understand what was happening. I've seen sober guys attempt to force themselves upon drunk girls. I've heard a lot of girls try to diminish the impact of being sexually assaulted while they were so drunk they were passed out--they-the girl--'shouldn't have been so dumb.' I lost the friendship of a guy I had really liked after he told me that he pushed a girl into having sex although she told him no, repeatedly. He didn't think he did anything wrong.

What I haven't seen or heard is a girl --or a guy--claim to be raped after mutually consented sex, even if one or both was drunk. I am sure that happens but not

a) "feel better" about what?
b) there you go, using the word FORCE again. Yes, if we take the word "unwanted" away, and replace it (as you did) with "force", then there is not much to disagree about. You again are exemplifying my point perfectly... you can't even describe a "rape situation" without the word "force".

 

[Toni]

No, but I can see how saying that would let you pretend to feel
m
better.

Look, I've watched drunk college aged guys try very hard to pick up girls who were very nicely, politely turning them down and then being escorted away from the obnoxious drunk guys hitting on them by sober or less drunk or at least less obnoxious guys who could clearly see that the girls were not interested. But the drunk guys remained unconvinced that those girls didn't 'want' them. Loudly insisted that the girls wanted them. Had to be prevented by others from pursuing the girls who left the party because of the obnoxious drunk guys.

Drunk people are not always very good at being able to determine their own level of drunkenness, impairment, capacity, etc. They still are quite able to force themselves upon other people who are not interested in their attentions. Sometimes, this includes sexual assault.

Drunk people are also pretty often ineffective at standing up for themselves, assessing a potentially dangerous or unwanted situation, or fending off an unwanted kiss--or unwanted sexual assault.

Drunk people are not allowed to legally drive automobiles or motorcycles. If they sign contracts or marry while inebriated, the contracts can be voided if challenged because the law recognizes that they are not capable of making decisions or effectively advocating for themselves.

I've seen drunk guys attempt to force themselves sexually upon girls who were drunker--to the point of being unable to stand or understand what was happening. I've seen sober guys attempt to force themselves upon drunk girls. I've heard a lot of girls try to diminish the impact of being sexually assaulted while they were so drunk they were passed out--they-the girl--'shouldn't have been so dumb.' I lost the friendship of a guy I had really liked after he told me that he pushed a girl into having sex although she told him no, repeatedly. He didn't think he did anything wrong.

What I haven't seen or heard is a girl --or a guy--claim to be raped after mutually consented sex, even if one or both was drunk. I am sure that happens but not

a) "feel better" about what?
b) there you go, using the word FORCE again. Yes, if we take the word "unwanted" away, and replace it (as you did) with "force", then there is not much to disagree about. You again are exemplifying my point perfectly... you can't even describe a "rape situation" without the word "force".

A) Your position.
B). Some time ago, a friend was at a party and drank a lot more than she realized or intended. But suppose she intended to get shit faced. Makes no difference. She was one of those very genial drunks, full of love and affection for the world. She happily embraced one of the guys at the party, gave him a big ole hug and loudly proclaimed how much she loved everybody---and then fell backwards on a bed. Her boyfriend had passed out drunk in another room but not before proclaiming his disgust at HER drunkenness. From the bed she said she loved everybody so much she just wanted to give them a big ole kiss. A line quickly formed and the mood got real ugly, real fast before I stepped in and shut it down. Before you decide I over reacted, belt buckles and zippers were being loosened. There were some disagreements about order and whether the boyfriend would object. Fortunately I has not been drinking and with a great deal of difficulty as she was about 8 inches taller than me, I maneuvered her to another unoccupied room and spent the rest if the night keeping guys from coming in. We were lucky. It could have ended very badly for both of us. There was no way that she understood what the guys had in mind nor was there any way she could have defended herself if she had. Not was she capable of consent. There was no force in the sense that no one was holding a gun to her head and no one beat her unconscious. Her level of inebriation made that totally unnecessary.

She didn't remember what happened except that she drank too much which was why she thought her boyfriend was angry with her.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Nobody's saying that drunken rape doesn't happen. What's being said is that this study doesn't give any information about the rate at which it happens amongst the population which was interviewed.

 

[thebeave]

This recently released report from the AAUW seems to be relevant to the discussion in this thread:

http://www.aauw.org/article/clery-act-data-analysis/

91 Percent of Colleges Reported Zero Incidents of Rape in 2014

Newly reported data required by the Clery Act indicate that the annual statistics collected by colleges and universities still do not tell the full story of sexual violence on campus. Many are familiar with the disturbing statistic that one in five women is sexually assaulted during college, but less well known is that more than one in five college women experiences physical abuse, sexual abuse, or threats of physical violence at the hands of an intimate partner.AAUW’s analysis of the 2014 data revealed the following.

Ninety-one percent of college campuses disclosed zero reported incidences of rape in 2014. With about 11,000 campuses disclosing annual crime data, an overwhelming majority of schools certified that in 2014 they did not receive a single report of a rape.

For the first time, we also have access to data regarding dating violence, domestic violence, and stalking incidents on campuses nationwide. But in these categories as well, only about 10 percent of college campuses disclosed a reported incident in 2014.

Among the nearly 4,000 main or primary campuses of colleges and universities with enrollment of at least 250 students, 76 percent disclosed zero rape reports in 2014.

About the only thing I can say for sure is that rape statistics on college campuses is just about the biggest clusterfuck I can think of. For what its worth, the AAUW has released some misleading stats and reports in the past, but they've generally leaned towards overstating various women victim issues, not understating.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

So what makes women on the other 9% of campuses so eager to falsely accuse men of rape? Is it Obama?