What college rape epidemic???

[Loren Pechtel]

According to this one, it's not an epidemic if the disease is permanently prevalent, or if the illness does not spread from person to person.

According to this one, it's an illness spread from person to person quickly. It has figurative uses, but they also require rapid growth.

I don't think it needs to be spread from person to person--you can have an epidemic when the vector is non-human. The key point is rapid growth as opposed to a steady state. We do not have a malaria epidemic in the world because it kills several hundred thousand year in and year out, it's not shooting up.

 

[laughing dog]

Why would you think an epidemic has to be recent?

Epidemic implies a short timeframe.

Oh well, if it isn't an epidemic, then there is nothing to worry about.

And in practice the rape rate has gone *WAY* down over time.

Source?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

According to this one, it's not an epidemic if the disease is permanently prevalent, or if the illness does not spread from person to person.

According to this one, it's an illness spread from person to person quickly. It has figurative uses, but they also require rapid growth.

I don't think it needs to be spread from person to person--you can have an epidemic when the vector is non-human. The key point is rapid growth as opposed to a steady state. We do not have a malaria epidemic in the world because it kills several hundred thousand year in and year out, it's not shooting up.

I was commenting on the definitions I linked to, and the first one you quote says "from person to person", so I got that one right, but I carried that over to the comment on the next one, which was a mistake.

But in any case, the point I was making is that there seemed to be miscommunication.

 

[Frikki]

So Loren why don't you come out and admit that you were mistaken with your OP?

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

According to this one, it's not an epidemic if the disease is permanently prevalent, or if the illness does not spread from person to person.

According to this one, it's an illness spread from person to person quickly. It has figurative uses, but they also require rapid growth.

I don't think it needs to be spread from person to person--you can have an epidemic when the vector is non-human. The key point is rapid growth as opposed to a steady state. We do not have a malaria epidemic in the world because it kills several hundred thousand year in and year out, it's not shooting up.

Fine... it is endemic then. Glad that important nitpick has been resolved.

 

[Jokodo]

So Loren why don't you come out and admit that you were mistaken with your OP?

One does not simply admit that one was mistaken. At best, one admits that the source used to justify one's claim doesn't actually do so, but there are plenty of other sources out there who do, but one can't look them up right now because one's currently sitting behind China's great firewall (or simply because one can't be bothered) so you've got to do your own homework.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

Why is the OP wrong exactly?

"College rape epidemic" does seem to be a myth.

Epidemic does imply a limited time period. If it has always been this way, it isn't an epidemic. It is just an ugly reality about humans.

And rape has been an ugly reality about humanity likely since before there were humans. It can be seen in most other mammals.

"college rape epidemic" implies that the "epidemic" is at colleges more than elsewhere. Is it? We've seen no evidence to suggest that it is. We have only seen evidence in this thread that there are more reported cases off campus.

So, "What college rape epidemic?" is a good question. That people insist on presuming that to be so, without any evidence, would in itself be something notable though.

 

[Toni]

Perhaps endemic would be a better term. Or more accurately, pandemic as rape and sexual assault is a serious problem world wide. College campuses are simply an environment where it is more likely that there are attempts to identify, quantify, publicize and address the issue(s).

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Perhaps endemic would be a better term. Or more accurately, pandemic as rape and sexual assault is a serious problem world wide.

Pandemic refers to an epidemic that is widespread. This is perhaps one of the dumbest derails about rape ever.

College campuses are simply an environment where it is more likely that there are attempts to identify, quantify, publicize and address the issue(s).

A college campus mixes hormones, alcohol, and people of typically bad judgement together and hopes nothing bad happens.

The fact of the matter is, rapes would be far less common if women were just more submissive. *shady eyes*

 

[Tom Sawyer]

The fact of the matter is, rapes would be far less common if women were just more submissive. *shady eyes*

Ya, this is the point that all the discussions about rape tend to gloss over. If women would just say yes whenever a man wants to have sex with them, the incidences of rape would drop to zero.

 

[ronburgundy]

It also assumes that all the "self reporters" are telling the truth and that the respondents to the survey are a representative sample of all college students.

Self reports are used extensively in criminology studies. Read the article that I posted it has a nice explanation.

The real problem is not truth telling, but the the interpretation of the question. The women are not reporting being raped or assaulted. That is the interpretation of the researchers. They are counting a woman as "raped" if they say that anyone ever had any level sexual contact with them (including kissing) while they were unable to consent because they were drunk or asleep. That includes boyfriends and even husbands that made out with them while they were drunk or kissed them while they were asleep. The respondents do not need to view the act as any form of assault or in any way wrong or unwanted. In fact, other research using these questions shows that most women counted as being raped using these questions do not view the act as wrong. IT just means that technically someone did kiss or grope them while they had been "drunk" (which can mean completely conscious and aware) or sleeping as couples often do.

Another problem is the fact that 58% of the people given the survey did not bother to complete it and return it. That is a massive sampling bias, and nothing in their methods deals with the fact that non-responders are generally people who do not see the survey as relevant to them, which in this case means they were not raped even by the researchers loose definition of it. It could easily be that nearly all non-responders would not qualify as being raped by their definition, making the number closer to 1 in 11, with many or most of those being people who mutually groped or kissed their regular sexual partner while intoxicated and not "raped" or assaulted as the concept is understood by the vast majority of people.

 

[laughing dog]

Another problem is the fact that 58% of the people given the survey did not bother to complete it and return it. That is a massive sampling bias, and nothing in their methods deals with the fact that non-responders are generally people who do not see the survey as relevant to them, which in this case means they were not raped even by the researchers loose definition of it. It could easily be that nearly all non-responders would not qualify as being raped by their definition, making the number closer to 1 in 11, with many or most of those being people who mutually groped or kissed their regular sexual partner while intoxicated and not "raped" or assaulted as the concept is understood by the vast majority of people.

Fascinating. You can tell why anonymous people did not respond to a survey.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Epidemic implies a short timeframe.

Oh well, if it isn't an epidemic, then there is nothing to worry about.

And in practice the rape rate has gone *WAY* down over time.

Source?

This has come up before. Since you don't seem to remember it and it was easy to google:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#/media/File:Rapes_per_1000_people_1973-2003.jpg

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Why is the OP wrong exactly?

"College rape epidemic" does seem to be a myth.

Epidemic does imply a limited time period. If it has always been this way, it isn't an epidemic. It is just an ugly reality about humans.

And rape has been an ugly reality about humanity likely since before there were humans. It can be seen in most other mammals.

"college rape epidemic" implies that the "epidemic" is at colleges more than elsewhere. Is it? We've seen no evidence to suggest that it is. We have only seen evidence in this thread that there are more reported cases off campus.

So, "What college rape epidemic?" is a good question. That people insist on presuming that to be so, without any evidence, would in itself be something notable though.

Exactly. Nobody has shown I'm wrong. They're just ignoring the facts in favor of the myth.

 

[laughing dog]

Oh well, if it isn't an epidemic, then there is nothing to worry about.

And in practice the rape rate has gone *WAY* down over time.

Source?

This has come up before. Since you don't seem to remember it and it was easy to google:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#/media/File:Rapes_per_1000_people_1973-2003.jpg

Those are reported rapes. An interesting site is bureau of justice rape statistics reporting the "highlights" of its Dec. 2014 study:

The rate of rape and sexual assault was 1.2 times higher for nonstudents (7.6 per 1,000) than for students (6.1 per 1,000).
For both college students and nonstudents, the offender was known to the victim in about 80% of rape and sexual assault victimizations.
Most (51%) student rape and sexual assault victimizations occurred while the victim was pursuing leisure activities away from home, compared to nonstudents who were engaged in other activities at home (50%) when the victimization occurred.
The offender had a weapon in about 1 in 10 rape and sexual assault victimizations against both students and nonstudents.
Rape and sexual assault victimizations of students (80%) were more likely than nonstudent victimizations (67%) to go unreported to police.

Notice the study found that students are much less likely to report incidents to the police, and that well over half of all incidents are not reported to the police. And they find that rate of rape and sexual assault per 1000 is about 12 times the rate in the last year (2003) of your graph.

But continue to persist in minimizing the problem of rape and rape on campuses.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Self reports are used extensively in criminology studies. Read the article that I posted it has a nice explanation.

The real problem is not truth telling, but the the interpretation of the question. The women are not reporting being raped or assaulted. That is the interpretation of the researchers. They are counting a woman as "raped" if they say that anyone ever had any level sexual contact with them (including kissing) while they were unable to consent because they were drunk or asleep. That includes boyfriends and even husbands that made out with them while they were drunk or kissed them while they were asleep. The respondents do not need to view the act as any form of assault or in any way wrong or unwanted. In fact, other research using these questions shows that most women counted as being raped using these questions do not view the act as wrong. IT just means that technically someone did kiss or grope them while they had been "drunk" (which can mean completely conscious and aware) or sleeping as couples often do.

Yup. They don't get enough rapes looking at the data honestly so they rigged things to list women as raped when they weren't raped.

Another problem is the fact that 58% of the people given the survey did not bother to complete it and return it. That is a massive sampling bias, and nothing in their methods deals with the fact that non-responders are generally people who do not see the survey as relevant to them, which in this case means they were not raped even by the researchers loose definition of it. It could easily be that nearly all non-responders would not qualify as being raped by their definition, making the number closer to 1 in 11, with many or most of those being people who mutually groped or kissed their regular sexual partner while intoxicated and not "raped" or assaulted as the concept is understood by the vast majority of people.

Yup. A non-response level like that really hurts the data.

- - - Updated - - -

Oh well, if it isn't an epidemic, then there is nothing to worry about.

And in practice the rape rate has gone *WAY* down over time.

Source?

This has come up before. Since you don't seem to remember it and it was easy to google:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_statistics#/media/File:Rapes_per_1000_people_1973-2003.jpg

Those are reported rapes. An interesting site is bureau of justice rape statistics reporting the "highlights" of its Dec. 2014 study:

The rate of rape and sexual assault was 1.2 times higher for nonstudents (7.6 per 1,000) than for students (6.1 per 1,000).
For both college students and nonstudents, the offender was known to the victim in about 80% of rape and sexual assault victimizations.
Most (51%) student rape and sexual assault victimizations occurred while the victim was pursuing leisure activities away from home, compared to nonstudents who were engaged in other activities at home (50%) when the victimization occurred.
The offender had a weapon in about 1 in 10 rape and sexual assault victimizations against both students and nonstudents.
Rape and sexual assault victimizations of students (80%) were more likely than nonstudent victimizations (67%) to go unreported to police.

Notice the study found that students are much less likely to report incidents to the police, and that well over half of all incidents are not reported to the police. And they find that rate of rape and sexual assault per 1000 is about 12 times the rate in the last year (2003) of your graph.

But continue to persist in minimizing the problem of rape and rape on campuses.

The point is the line going down.

 

[Toni]

The real problem is not truth telling, but the the interpretation of the question. The women are not reporting being raped or assaulted. That is the interpretation of the researchers. They are counting a woman as "raped" if they say that anyone ever had any level sexual contact with them (including kissing) while they were unable to consent because they were drunk or asleep. That includes boyfriends and even husbands that made out with them while they were drunk or kissed them while they were asleep. The respondents do not need to view the act as any form of assault or in any way wrong or unwanted. In fact, other research using these questions shows that most women counted as being raped using these questions do not view the act as wrong. IT just means that technically someone did kiss or grope them while they had been "drunk" (which can mean completely conscious and aware) or sleeping as couples often do.

Yup. They don't get enough rapes looking at the data honestly so they rigged things to list women as raped when they weren't raped.

Actually, different agencies used different methodologies and different definitions of rape and sexual assault. The rest is just stuff that ronburgundy is making up and Loren is agreeing with.

Another problem is the fact that 58% of the people given the survey did not bother to complete it and return it. That is a massive sampling bias, and nothing in their methods deals with the fact that non-responders are generally people who do not see the survey as relevant to them, which in this case means they were not raped even by the researchers loose definition of it. It could easily be that nearly all non-responders would not qualify as being raped by their definition, making the number closer to 1 in 11, with many or most of those being people who mutually groped or kissed their regular sexual partner while intoxicated and not "raped" or assaulted as the concept is understood by the vast majority of people.

Yup. A non-response level like that really hurts the data.

You have got to be kidding. A response rate of 42 percent is actually a high response rate to a random survey. It's extremely high if you view those surveyed as the general public or even as members/customers.

But nice try at blaming women again.

 

[Duke Leto]

I'll just leave this here, for no one in particular.

I feel you have grievously insulted the dense and motherfuckers in this comparison.

 

[laughing dog]

The point is the line going down.

The line ends in 2003. The data from the same source indicates the rape and sexual rate is 12 times higher than the end point of your graph.

 

[Frikki]

Self reports are used extensively in criminology studies. Read the article that I posted it has a nice explanation.

The real problem is not truth telling, but the the interpretation of the question. The women are not reporting being raped or assaulted. That is the interpretation of the researchers. They are counting a woman as "raped" if they say that anyone ever had any level sexual contact with them (including kissing) while they were unable to consent because they were drunk or asleep. That includes boyfriends and even husbands that made out with them while they were drunk or kissed them while they were asleep. The respondents do not need to view the act as any form of assault or in any way wrong or unwanted. In fact, other research using these questions shows that most women counted as being raped using these questions do not view the act as wrong. IT just means that technically someone did kiss or grope them while they had been "drunk" (which can mean completely conscious and aware) or sleeping as couples often do.

Another problem is the fact that 58% of the people given the survey did not bother to complete it and return it. That is a massive sampling bias, and nothing in their methods deals with the fact that non-responders are generally people who do not see the survey as relevant to them, which in this case means they were not raped even by the researchers loose definition of it. It could easily be that nearly all non-responders would not qualify as being raped by their definition, making the number closer to 1 in 11, with many or most of those being people who mutually groped or kissed their regular sexual partner while intoxicated and not "raped" or assaulted as the concept is understood by the vast majority of people.

This is what the survey asked about.

"Nonconsensual or unwanted sexual contact” including:

* forced touching of a sexual nature (forced kissing, touching of private parts, grabbing, fondling, rubbing up against you in a sexual way, even if it is over your clothes)

* oral sex (someone’s mouth or tongue making contact with your genitals or your mouth or tongue making contact with someone else’s genitals)

* sexual intercourse (someone’s penis being put in your vagina)

* anal sex (someone’s penis being put in your anus)

* sexual penetration with a finger or object (someone putting their finger or an object like a bottle or a candle in your vagina or anus)."


Now you say you have "other research using these questions shows that most women counted as being raped using these questions do not view the act as wrong." Can you point me towards this other "research".