What college rape epidemic???

[Loren Pechtel]

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

1 in 5?? Try 1 in 50!

And she's more likely to be raped if she doesn't go to college than if she does. It's young women that get raped, not college women.

 

[Frikki]

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

1 in 5?? Try 1 in 50!

And she's more likely to be raped if she doesn't go to college than if she does. It's young women that get raped, not college women.

Read this.

http://time.com/3633903/campus-rape-1-in-5-sexual-assault-setting-record-straight/

It discusses what the 1 in 5 statistic really is. The 1 in 5 is self report in a survey and what you are talking about is report to the police. The dark figure for assault, rape and sexual assault is huge.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, there is no epidemic of rape because it is only one out of 52 (or is it 50).

 

[Tom Sawyer]

Yes, there is no epidemic of rape because it is only one out of 52 (or is it 50).

I think the point is that there's nothing specific to colleges which goes towards encouraging rape and that the women there are safer than anywhere else.

 

[Derec]

It discusses what the 1 in 5 statistic really is. The 1 in 5 is self report in a survey and what you are talking about is report to the police. The dark figure for assault, rape and sexual assault is huge.

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.
It is telling that when comparing apples to apples (actual police reports) the sexual assault rate on colleges is actually lower than the same age group as a whole. So to paint colleges as cesspools of rampant sexual assault is ridiculous.

 

[Rhea]

Yes, there is no epidemic of rape because it is only one out of 52 (or is it 50).

I think the point is that there's nothing specific to colleges which goes towards encouraging rape and that the women there are safer than anywhere else.

This would be true if we assume that the rate of not-reporting-because-the-system-is-so-fucking-ugly-toward-victims is the same on or off campus.

Is it safe to assume that?

 

[braces_for_impact]

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

 

[Derec]

This would be true if we assume that the rate of not-reporting-because-the-system-is-so-fucking-ugly-toward-victims is the same on or off campus.

Is it safe to assume that?

Why would there be a difference when a college student vs. non-college student reports a crime?
As far as college kangaroo courts, they have been designed to make the process skewed toward women making the allegations and hostile to the men being accused, from ridiculously low burden of proof to curtailing due process rights and massively expanding what constitutes "sexual assault" well into consensual territory.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This would be true if we assume that the rate of not-reporting-because-the-system-is-so-fucking-ugly-toward-victims is the same on or off campus.

Is it safe to assume that?

Why would there be a difference when a college student vs. non-college student reports a crime?
As far as college kangaroo courts, they have been designed to make the process skewed toward women making the allegations and hostile to the men being accused, from ridiculously low burden of proof to curtailing due process rights and massively expanding what constitutes "sexual assault" well into consensual territory.

If this were exactly true, wouldn't literally tens of thousands of males be getting expelled from College annually?

- - - Updated - - -

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/rsavcaf9513.pdf

1 in 5?? Try 1 in 50!

And she's more likely to be raped if she doesn't go to college than if she does. It's young women that get raped, not college women.

One in fifty? In college, if 1 in 50 had TB, that'd be a big deal. If 1 in 50 were killed, that'd be a big deal.

1 in 5 would be absolutely alarming and unthinkable.

 

[Tom Sawyer]

I think the point is that there's nothing specific to colleges which goes towards encouraging rape and that the women there are safer than anywhere else.

This would be true if we assume that the rate of not-reporting-because-the-system-is-so-fucking-ugly-toward-victims is the same on or off campus.

Is it safe to assume that?

That sounds like a very safe assumption. Pretty much every rape discussion has brought up how difficult and traumatic it is to go through the process of charging someone with rape. I don't see why the rape occuring on a campus would make it so much more difficult and traumatic as to throw off the reporting numbers to a significant degree.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

This would be true if we assume that the rate of not-reporting-because-the-system-is-so-fucking-ugly-toward-victims is the same on or off campus.

Is it safe to assume that?

That sounds like a very safe assumption. Pretty much every rape discussion has brought up how difficult and traumatic it is to go through the process of charging someone with rape. I don't see why the rape occuring on a campus would make it so much more difficult and traumatic as to throw off the reporting numbers to a significant degree.

Closer confines, having to see the alleged rapist more often, tighter social constraints. I could see an argument for and against.

 

[laughing dog]

Yes, there is no epidemic of rape because it is only one out of 52 (or is it 50).

I think the point is that there's nothing specific to colleges which goes towards encouraging rape and that the women there are safer than anywhere else.

So, there is simply a rape epidemic. Wonderful.

 

[Frikki]

It discusses what the 1 in 5 statistic really is. The 1 in 5 is self report in a survey and what you are talking about is report to the police. The dark figure for assault, rape and sexual assault is huge.

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.
It is telling that when comparing apples to apples (actual police reports) the sexual assault rate on colleges is actually lower than the same age group as a whole. So to paint colleges as cesspools of rampant sexual assault is ridiculous.

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

 

[Tom Sawyer]

That sounds like a very safe assumption. Pretty much every rape discussion has brought up how difficult and traumatic it is to go through the process of charging someone with rape. I don't see why the rape occuring on a campus would make it so much more difficult and traumatic as to throw off the reporting numbers to a significant degree.

Closer confines, having to see the alleged rapist more often, tighter social constraints. I could see an argument for and against.

Yes, there are clearly some different parameters which could either raise or lower the difficulty and trauma associated with it. They're in closer confines which could make it more difficult, they are in a more liberal and educated environment which coudl have less stigma towards rape victims which could make it easier, etc, etc, etc. Vague potential effects of poorly defined parameters aren't a counter to hard numbers outside of the anti-vaccination crowd, however.

If someone can demonstrate what would make a statistically distinct difference in the reporting and why, it would undermine the conclusions of the study. If not, it's safe to assume that the rates of reporting would be similar between the two environments.

 

[Jimmy Higgins]

Closer confines, having to see the alleged rapist more often, tighter social constraints. I could see an argument for and against.

Yes, there are clearly some different parameters which could either raise or lower the difficulty and trauma associated with it. They're in closer confines which could make it more difficult, they are in a more liberal and educated environment which coudl have less stigma towards rape victims which could make it easier, etc, etc, etc. Vague potential effects of poorly defined parameters aren't a counter to hard numbers outside of the anti-vaccination crowd, however.

If someone can demonstrate what would make a statistically distinct difference in the reporting and why, it would undermine the conclusions of the study. If not, it's safe to assume that the rates of reporting would be similar between the two environments.

All I know about collegiate issues of rape is what I learned in Season Three of Veronica Mars, but that was on a second tier network, so I can only take it so far.

 

[Toni]

It discusses what the 1 in 5 statistic really is. The 1 in 5 is self report in a survey and what you are talking about is report to the police. The dark figure for assault, rape and sexual assault is huge.

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.
It is telling that when comparing apples to apples (actual police reports) the sexual assault rate on colleges is actually lower than the same age group as a whole. So to paint colleges as cesspools of rampant sexual assault is ridiculous.

The one in five figure is and always has been the LIFETIME rate, not the annual rate. In other words, one out of every five women will be a victim of rape in her lifetime.

Rape, sexual assault and other victimization rates are higher among women of color and women living in poverty. If one understands anything at all about relative power, it is not hard to understand why poor women and women of color are more likely to be victims.

 

[Jolly_Penguin]

I think the point is that there's nothing specific to colleges which goes towards encouraging rape and that the women there are safer than anywhere else.

So, there is simply a rape epidemic. Wonderful.

Or maybe not. Maybe this has always been true. Have the numbers had a massive upswing recently, or is this just a sad fact about humanity?

 

[laughing dog]

So, there is simply a rape epidemic. Wonderful.

Or maybe not. Maybe this has always been true. Have the numbers had a massive upswing recently, or is this just a sad fact about humanity?

Why would you think an epidemic has to be recent?

 

[Angra Mainyu]

Or maybe not. Maybe this has always been true. Have the numbers had a massive upswing recently, or is this just a sad fact about humanity?

Why would you think an epidemic has to be recent?

He didn't say that, but it seems his alternative is not exhaustive (what if it's old, but not a sad fact about humanity, but started a few thousand years ago?)

There may be a problem of definitions lurking around. For example, if one goes by this definition, if the number of cases is what would be expected (doesn't specify how), it's not an epidemic.

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.

Similarly, this definition requires incidence beyond what is expected (it's not specified by whom?).

And so on. But you or others may have other concepts in mind, and if so, as a result of that and the assumption of a common language on the matter, miscommunication may ensue.

 

[Loren Pechtel]

Or maybe not. Maybe this has always been true. Have the numbers had a massive upswing recently, or is this just a sad fact about humanity?

Why would you think an epidemic has to be recent?

Epidemic implies a short timeframe.

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