"National statistics have consistently suggested that approximately one in four college-age women encounter an experience that meets the legal definition of rape or attempted rape during their college years. " That quote is from this article, which deftly parrots the politically correct ideology of radical gender feminism on the one-in-four stat; the problem is, that stat has been debunked.
Two primers that trace the one-in-four claim back to its disingenuous origins are the well-researched, landmark piece by equity feminist Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers: "An Investigation of Feminist Claims about Rape," and Heather MacDonald's "Campus Rape Myth" in last Winter's City Journal. Their findings won't be repeated here, but Ms. MacDonald makes an intuitive point often lost on the zealots:
If the one-in-four statistic is correct—it is sometimes modified to “one-in-five to one-in-four”—campus rape represents a crime wave of unprecedented proportions. No crime, much less one as serious as rape, has a victimization rate remotely approaching 20 or 25 percent, even over many years. The 2006 violent crime rate in Detroit, one of the most violent cities in America, was 2,400 murders, rapes, robberies, and aggravated assaults per 100,000 inhabitants—a rate of 2.4 percent. The one-in-four statistic would mean that every year, millions of young women graduate who have suffered the most terrifying assault, short of murder, that a woman can experience. Such a crime wave would require nothing less than a state of emergency—Take Back the Night rallies and 24-hour hotlines would hardly be adequate to counter this tsunami of sexual violence. Admissions policies letting in tens of thousands of vicious criminals would require a complete revision, perhaps banning boys entirely. The nation’s nearly 10 million female undergrads would need to take the most stringent safety precautions. Certainly, they would have to alter their sexual behavior radically to avoid falling prey to the rape epidemic.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
26 comments:
The spreading of the 1 in 4 rape myth is a form of hate speech.
Hate speech is considered faulty and inflammatory misinformation that builds a prejudice...""BASED ON FAULTY AND INFLAMMATORY INFORMATION..""
Those groups that spread this faulty and inflammatory misinformation should be considered for what they are..a form of hate group!!
when I was in school in the late 80's they were, I think, still hooked on the 33% number - and that was of *all* women. So maybe after 20 years, things are looking up?
The liars will keep badmouthing men for as long as our society enables them to. There is no limit to what they'll sink to.
The problem, of course, is that there have been a multitude of studies which have found similar results. But why are you getting so defensive and taking these statistics so personally?
Was there some place in those articles that said "all men rape"? So why assume that was implied?
Very rarely will a rapist admit he forced himself onto someone else without their consent. Does this mean that rape never happens? No, it means every rapist lies about rape.
As to the assertion that "well no other crime occurs in such high numbers, therefore rape can't occur in such large numbers" is so far out in crazy land it doesn't even bear discussing.
So really, to repeat the most important question: why are you getting so defensive and taking these statistics so personally?
Racism creates a gross harm upon minorities. It appears kind of narcisstic for a white person to be more concerned about imaginary blanket condemnation of white people, then to be working to stop racism. I hope you can see the identical corollary to sexism...
Sorry, that came out wrong.
As to the assertion that "well no other crime occurs in such high numbers, therefore rape can't occur in such large numbers" is so far out in crazy land it doesn't even bear discussing.
One of the reasons that the rape prevalence is so high is precisely because rape is not taken as seriously as other crimes. There does not exist websites whose primary purpose is denigrating all victims of murder or seeking justifications for murderers.
As soon as more people attribute the same level of concern as is given to other types of crime, the prevalence rate will decrease.
John there are so many assumptions in your posts its difficult to know where to begin.
Almost every point you make is wrong.
What I would like to comment on specifically is this:
John said:
As soon as more people attribute the same level of concern as is given to other types of crime, the prevalence rate (of rape) will decrease.
I suspect that society (and thus men and women) dont take rape seriously is because they know at a subconcious level, that women cant be trusted to tell the truth, even about rape.
with the advent of the internet, 24 hour news, and technology helping to expose false rape accusers, we are now starting to see what most men and woman subconciously knew all along, some women lie about being raped.
John
your whole post came out wrong. Can you cite any of those studies? What definintion of "rape" did they use? Regret the next day doesn't count as rape. Also, scienfically conducted studies have shown that 40-60% of rape accusations are false (Kanin; MacDowell).
Well, this is what I get for not moderating comments . . . . Now I have to respond to it. [Sigh]
John, your comments are difficult to follow. But I don’t think you have a firm grasp on this issue. You would do well to educate yourself by spending several hours reading through this site, or reading some of the stuff put out by Alan Dershowitz or the ACLU or the Innocence Project, because we are allied on these issues. Your comments strike me as politically based, unnuanced, and extremely naïve. You’ve completely mischaracterized what we do here.
We are intent on giving voice to one particular class of victims that a lot of people want to dismiss. You included. That’s our entire purpose. I will respond to your comments as best I can:
You say: “The problem, of course, is that there have been a multitude of studies which have found similar results.”
I am sorry. I do not understand what you mean by “similar results.” I am familiar with every major study in this area, and I know of none have answered the valid concerns of the two prominent authors cited in the post.
You say: “But why are you getting so defensive and taking these statistics so personally?”
Again, I am not certain what your point is, but your premise is peculiar, and factually incorrect. No one here is getting “defensive” about anything; now, the purveyors of the one-in-four stat who insist that myth is true, the facts be damned . . . well, now that’s what I’d call “defensive.” You may have figured out by now that I counsel men falsely accused of rape. Their victimization is ignored and denigrated by people – frankly – like you, for political reasons. The motivations of people who dismiss their victimization are difficult to understand, and I find them to be mean-spirited. Law-and-order types on the right and extreme radical gender feminists on the left are the ones quickest to dismiss their victimization. I can’t tell where you fall, but either way, your views on this seem informed by politics instead of facts. Men and boys who are falsely accused (and, yeah, most of the falsely accused are teens to early twenties) are treated as the flotsam of the criminal justice system. It is clear to many of us who are involved in this area that their victimization is dismissed or minimized precisely because the culture of rape hysteria fuels false claims: http://falserapesociety.blogspot.com/2008/11/culture-of-radical-feminist-rape.html When rape is viewed as rampant, and when every rape claim “must” be believed automatically, innocent men and boys are treated as criminals based on nothing more than an allegation. All we are asking is that every claim of rape be treated objectively and fairly, and that we stop locking teenagers up for months based on an acquaintance rape accusation before a scrap of evidence is admitted at trial, much less before there is a conviction, OK? Now my question to you is this: I’ve revealed my interest in this subject. Why are YOU so defensive about the facts?
You say: “Does this mean that rape never happens?”
Again, I don’t know if this your hamfisted way of constructing a straw man, but you might be shocked to learn that we, too, think that rape is far too common. I have invited feminists to partner with me to do a Web site that would treat the entire rape issue – rape and false claims – in an objective, non-political manner. Why should any victim be dismissed? And why can’t we all work together to fight all the injustices in this area? As for false rape claims, we want to put an end to the hysterics and stop looking at every claim of rape as a political issue. Frankly, that’s what is happening. Every claim of rape should be examined on its merits, that’s all we’re asking.
You say: “As to the assertion that ‘well no other crime occurs in such high numbers, therefore rape can't occur in such large numbers’ is so far out in crazy land it doesn't even bear discussing.”
Where on earth did you come up with that one? The point that Ms. MacDonald was making is that if rape were as prevalent as the one-in-four purveyors assert, no parent would pay for their daughters to attend college. Rape is second only to murder on the scale of serious felonies. It is taken very, very seriously. Sentences for rape are second only to murder in length of time served. Would you put your daughter at grave risk by allowing her to attend college with any men if it were true that one-in-four women will be raped? (And I’ve seen that figure described as one-in-four freshman college women BEFORE THANKSGIVING!) The point is made just to illustrate that it is absurd to think rape is that prevalent. The students don’t think it is, so they are constantly told that they don’t realize they are being raped. Does this mean there does not need to be better communication, and better education? We need to teach our young people the legal definition of consent – it really does mean consent. But it’s an objective standard, based on a young woman’s outward manifestations. If she acts as though she wants to have sex and isn’t so drunk that she can’t give valid consent, it’s valid consent. And did you know that recent studies show that young women experience greater ex post facto regret about one-night-stands? These feelings translate into feelings of having been “used,” and that is sometimes blown into a rape claim. Drinking plays a major role. Look, I’m all for reducing misunderstandings. I don’t like the macho sex culture where college guys are trying to get women into bed. Let’s go after that, but let’s stop mischaracterizing consensual sex as rape.
You say: “Racism creates a gross harm upon minorities. It appears kind of narcisstic for a white person to be more concerned about imaginary blanket condemnation of white people, then to be working to stop racism. I hope you can see the identical corollary to sexism...”
Again, I have no idea where this is coming from except that you have labeled me a sexist. My interest here is very narrow. My beliefs are what you’d call those of an equity feminist (but I refuse to use the “f” word because it has become a loaded term). I am for equality in every realm, of course. I support most of the rape shield laws as positive things. I think your point seems to be that sexism is a greater social ill than false rape claims? If so, why do you insist on weighing social maladies? Why can’t I speak up for a wrong that is ignored – again, by people like you – without being criticized? And called a “troll”? (Yeah, that was you, wasn’t it?) The mere fact that I might have a football blog doesn’t mean I hate baseball. The mere fact that I have this blog – because NOBODY else will even talk about these issues – doesn’t mean I don’t think rape is a serious problem.
You say: “One of the reasons that the rape prevalence is so high is precisely because rape is not taken as seriously as other crimes. There does not exist websites whose primary purpose is denigrating all victims of murder or seeking justifications for murderers.”
Again, I am lost. First, “rape prevalence is so high” is a conclusion. It is high; but it’s not one-in-four high. And secondly, if you think this Web site denigrates victims of rape, you are mentally unstable. We denigrate false accusers because what they do is evil. False accusers and rape victims have nothing in common, sir. Our goal is to insist that one particular class of victim not be ignore or dismissed, as you seem to be dismissing them. That’s all.
It would be nice if you could speak up with us for the men and boys who are falsely accused instead of turning a blind eye to them. I presume you really are a guy, and – it could happen to you.
John said:
Was there some place in those articles that said "all men rape"? So why assume that was implied?
"All men are rapists and that's all they are." Marilyn French in People, February 20, 1983
So yes, I personally take exception to being called a rapist, when I have NEVER done anything of the sort.
The problem is, rape, outside of prison and select other incidents is a male on female crime. However, false rape accusations, are almost entirely a female on male crime, which can result in the loss of freedom, loss of family, job, honor and self-esteem, just to name a few.
And keep in mind, those who are sent to prison over a false accusation, tend to be raped while in prison. So yes, false accusations are a huge problem. I can't envision have such a vile act perpetrated on anyone, let alone someone who was innocent of any wrongdoing.
No, it means every rapist lies about rape.
This has nothing to do with false accusations. Again, posts such as yours do nothing but try to deflect the discussion away from the problem of false accusations.
I'm so tired of hearing that "she was to intoxicated to give consent." It allows women to once again, avoid any form of responsibility for thier actions. Did someone force them to drink? So long as women are given a pass on responsibility, then we will continue to see men accused of a multitude of acts they never committed, and sent to prison.
There is an article on this site, that talks of Tim Cole, who was convicted of a rape he didn't commit in 1985, and sebsequently died in prison in 1999 at the age of 38. He spent more than a third of his life in jail, and died there, for something he didn't do.
The 1 in 4 myth (and it is a myth), was determined by a poll in which questions such as:
Have you ever had sex with someone and regretted it the next day?
That was classified as rape. But regret is NOT the same thing.
1. the unlawful compelling of a woman through physical force or duress to have sexual intercourse.
2. any act of sexual intercourse that is forced upon a person.
So regret, or being inebriated to the point that you don't remember if you gave consent, does not contitute rape. Perhaps women and men need to be taught what consent is/isn't. And hold people accountable for thier actions(this is perhaps the biggest change needed, as currently, women are not generally held accountable for thier actions).
Great responses guys! (Don't forget, "John" might be a troll. That would tend to explain why "he" comes up with out-of-this-world statements).
P.S. Archivist,
be careful about using the word "equity". That is one of those fancy feminist words that actually can be taken to mean "special advantages for women".
I realize you weren't using it that way, but if everyone starts using it (the word itself), it will appear to make the concept valid by way of word association in the public's mind. It's an example of the sneaky psychology feminists use.
(I'm not pulling this out my butt - it is gone into in some depth in "Legalizing Misandry")
Norm, the term "equity feminist" is a term of art that is not to be confused with maintream or gender feminism. Dr. Christina Hoff Sommers is the most prominent equity feminist, and she's an icon for people interested in fairness when it comes to rape claims and other things as well. Read her article cited in the post, which says stop the rape hysteria and stop thinking of rape as a male-female issue. It's a "criminal-innocent person" issue. Ain't no male bashing there, and that's who we need as our ally. If she called herself a Martian, that's what I'd want to be -- so sorry if the word "feminism" rubs some people the wrong way. An equity feminist is not considered a real "feminist" by mainstream feminism, which is populated by radical gender feminists. Too bad for them, because she is a champion for really empowering women without trying to take
imaginary privilege away from men and without privileging women over men. Every guy who reads this site needs to be familiar with her, because she's a champion for both men and fair-minded women. Most Americans who never give a thought to gender issues identify with the thinking of equity feminism -- equal opportunity for all, but not to elevate women over men just because they are women.
Norm said...
Don't forget, "John" might be a troll. That would tend to explain why "he" comes up with out-of-this-world statements).
Norm, I think you may have hit the nail on the head.
On at least two occasions in two different internet forums, I have had discussions with members claiming to be male.
In the most recent discussion with one 'male', I was called 'creepy', for suggesting that women should be punished for their crimes.
Males do not use the word 'creepy' (at least not in England). Females use this word against men as a put-down or to shut men up. I told the 'male' member this, and there was no reply.
Another discussion I had was actually on a men's forum, where again, a supposedly 'male' member spoke in a quite obvious feminine language style, particularly using words in sets of 3. One of 'his' sentences was 'my wife is a beutiful, intelligent and strong woman'. Men do not speak in sets of 3 like this. I have never heard a man speak like this. Also, the words are ideals of what women themselves would like to be seen as, 'intelligent' and 'strong'. Men are unlikey to use these words to describe their wives, much less together in the same sentence.
In regards to 'John', there was no obvious feminine language style, or female key words to give 'him' away, but 'his' whole stance was odd and illogical on almost every point.
I think we have to be careful that sometimes we may be dealing with devious women.
Steve, people like John are the price we pay for not moderating comments. But they also serve a valuable purpose: they underscore that our positions here are not vulnerable to attack. John's beef seems to be that we shouldn't be concerned about the one-in-four lie since, I suppose in his/her world, we are supporting rapists by speaking out against it. How absurd. We're not supporting rapists by oppposing the rape hysteria that leads falsely accused men to be treated like so much flotsam. You know, if we'd all just look at the facts, and take the politics out of these issues, more people would be interested in attacking this as a crime issue and not as an issue of far left social policy.
Archivist,
You talk sense, and I hope you never stop being reasoned and moderate in your responses.
However, The way I see it, the problem isnt so much politics or the uninformed.
At its root, it is that women put their own interests (and as they see it, their survival) above justice.
This is a battle of the sexes, being waged against men, by what basically amounts to animals with a victimisation complex.
We have been told by women themselves about this battle of the sexes time and time again, but we men refuse to acknowledge it in any serious way.
They have seen that we were scared, and they have now become organised ('the feminist movement'), and ratcheted up the battle.
I think that women will keep on pushing because they dont know when to stop, and whats good for them.
Eventually men in the west will be forced to face the female problem, because it is fast becoming intolerable.
Im going to let you in on a (not so) secret.
I am a man. But I have female characteristics, not only physically (blonde hair, green eyes, feminine bone structure of the face (infact I look like my mother, not my dark father), The most interesting thing is that I have somewhat of a victimisation complex too. However, my logical and fair male side overrides everything and stops me from being destructive and acting like a female.
I know exactly how women think. Not only have I got this inherent female victimisation characteristic, but I have suffered from them and observed them all my life. You cannot reason with most of these people. They are female first and foremost, then they are individuals.
Its about safety in numbers for them, the same way that animals think.
Archivist,
I read Hoff Sommers "War Against Boys" a couple years ago.
I suppose I can see where if you are using the word 'equity' in a very specific way, "equity feminist", then one may take it the way you intended, if they've read Hoff-Sommers or somehow or another know of its use in this way. But I would wonder how she herself came up with it, or where she got it from? The fact is that in calling herself a feminist, she is in effect stating that she believes women are at a disadvantage compared to men, when in fact the opposite is true. So she may view "equity" (the way I use it) as a valid goal (see below).
------------------------------
A brief description of how this "issue" is explained in the source I mentioned: there is true equality on the one hand (egalitarian feminism), and then there is equality of result ("equity feminism") on the other. When knowledgeable feminists use the word equity, they mean the latter; and they see no reason to try and hide this, in fact they stress it; because they know the public assumes the two concepts are compatible, or are in fact one. And most people would think, "what could ever be wrong with equity". No-one would dare challenge it, at least not publicly.
But the problem is that equity feminism is indeed very unfair and harmful to men. That is because it assumes that only women have problems, and thus only women's needs must be addressed. This thinking is the source of policies such as college entrance quotas for women but not for men, affirmative action for women but not for men, etc.
---------------------
Quite frankly, I'm always suspicious when a woman calling herself a feminist claims, or appears, to be "on our side". Noted examples include Kathleen Parker, who, if you read her carefully, you realize is coming from a somewhat dubious place. "Why Men are Important" (or whatever the book is called) is an obviously condescending title, whether it is intentional condescension or not. It tells us something about her.
Guys who respond to that by saying "well Norm, so what if she does not speak the exact way you want her to - you're too picky", are the same (usually younger) guys who have at least to some extent bought into the feminist mentality, though they would heatedly deny that. Many of them are MRA's.
Another example is Wendy McElroy (ifeminists). She claims to be in favor of the MR movement, but criticizes us when we do not obey, when protesting, the politically correct rules which have been set up by ..feminists such as herself!! She holds us to unrealistic standards, when in fact the early feminists were "no holds barred".
"Women put their own interests..above justice"
Bingo!!
"The fundamental defect of women is their lack of a sense of justice" -- Schopenhauer
Thanks, Norm.
First, trust me, I'm not one of the younger guys; I've been out of law school a long, long time.
Your points are always well taken. You are a true believer.
Your understanding of equity feminism markedly differs from mine. As I understand it, equity feminism refers to the movement that corrected and where necessary still corrects systmeic conditions where women have been denied equality of OPPORTUNITY. The right to vote comes to mind. The right to go to college. The right to work in a big corporation. Equity feminism believes that women have largely succeeded in their mission. It does not believe in patriarchy or in male oppression. It loathes male bashing. It does not want special privileges or equality of OUTCOME, only equality of opportunity and equal justice under law. Ms. Sommers needs no defense, and I guess I'm really not too concerned if my support of Ms. Sommers is in some way not acceptable to the MRA community -- that's one of my faults, I suppose, I don't really believe in orthodoxy. I call 'em as I see 'em. And let me say that I don't recall Ms. Sommers ever "claiming" to be on our side. Nor, in my opinion, does she just "appear" to be on our side -- she IS on our side, at least on this issue that I'm involved in. She was hissed off a college stage not that long ago because of her comments about the "Vagina Monologues" and its blatant male bashing -- so, yes, she actually walks the walk. She doesn't have to claim nothing cause she's doin' it.
Hers is the definitive rebuttal to the one-in-four nonsense. Period. It is an ingenious argument. As someone who, for many years, has come up with arguments for some of the best known companies in the world, I will say outright that I find her argumentation brilliant. So, whatever the hell she calls herself, I am OK with it.
Anyway, I am not really interested in getting into a debate over semantics. And, yes, I understand that equity feminism isn't taking the lead on fathers' rights issues and other things where men are disadvantaged. But people like this are our allies, and on rape -- she's actually one of the leaders.
So I'm not going to get bogged down in nomenclature. What I am interested in is a class of persons -- the falsely accused -- whose victimization is being ignored because the crime of rape has become unnecessarily politicized. These victims are treated as invisible -- flotsam -- collateral damage, all because a powerful far left lobby insists real rape victims won't "come forward" if we talk about the falsely accused.
Fair enough. I didn't mean to imply you yourself were one of the "younger guys" or "mra's that partially buy into feminism" or something; I didn't realize until later that my comment might have sounded that way. Also based on what you're saying and from what I've read of Sommers myself, I can see she's one our side (although she's really mainly active in the area of boys, not men). I really just wanted to get it off my chest about the other two. (as an aside, I just now looked in the index of "War against Boys" and don't see the word 'equity'. Maybe she says something about in "Who Stole Feminism")
Norm, we're on the same page, as always. The word "feminism" should be outlawed -- I think most Americans, at least, men and women both, would not say they are "feminists" precisely because mainstream feminism is nothing more than a political lobby for some women. The way it is practiced, it has nothing whatsoever to do with gender equality of opportunity. So we're on the same page.
First off, why is everyone assuming that "John" is really "Jane" just because his comments are refuting this post? May seem like a petty thing to point out, but what is says to me is that you guys are assuming all men think alike. "He's not agreeing with us, so he must be a woman," ha ha, wink, wink. Meanwhile, if a feminist were to make a generalization about men, you'd probably flip your lid.
Moving on, I think this blog is counterproductive. You claim it's meant to give voice to men who are wrongly accused of rape, but it really just seems like a platform for feminist bashing. Why not spend your time trying to launch or fund—maybe even in conjunction with feminists—a new study to determine the prevalence of rape? Because, hey, it's been 22 years since the 1-in-4 estimate came out, and we can probably use an update.
But if the new numbers show that, say, 1-in-10 women are raped or sexually assaulted (I doubt you'll find that, but let's just pretend), I ask you to consider this: Maybe that's just progress. Maybe, over the course of 22 years, the groundbreaking work of feminists is paying off. Because without them, we wouldn't be having any conversation about rape. Without them, we wouldn't have busted open the real rape myth: that it's a crime committed by a stranger, in a back alley.
As a 20-something woman who knows 1-in-4 women (and then some) who have been sexually assaulted, I'd like to say thank you to the feminists who came before me. You may not want to acknowledge them, but they did, and still do, some really great work.
No. 23's comments are incredibly insenstive. I come to this site every day, as I know other guys who were falsely accused, and it's hurtful to see someone comment like that.
Axel, my fault. I stopped moderating comments a long time ago. I apologize to the guys who read this site and who were falsely accused, and I know there are a lot of you. I think that this young woman's culture doesn't teach her that men can be victimized in this manner, and it certainly doesn't fit with her movement's metanarrative. Comments like hers can be triggering, I know, and I should rethink my moderation policy.
She would do well to read the incredible emails I get, mostly from women, about loved ones (almost always sons) who were falsely accused and asking for help. Heartbreaking.
The fact is, men are at times killed or kill themselves over a false rape claim; they are beaten and spat upon; they lose their wives, their girlfriends, their social support, their jobs and their businesses. Few men emerge unscathed from a false rape claim, and for most it is the worst thing they will ever experience in their lives.
Why in the hell can't we de-politicize these issues and start talking about VICTIMS -- of both rape and false claims -- instead of insisting that one gender has a monopoly on victimization? Or is that asking for too much commmon sense?
No. 25: First why are you assuming that "everyone" here assumes John is a Jane? I have no idea if John is a woman, do you? Most of the hate mail I receive (e.g., "I hope you're brutally raped") comes from people who self-identify as women. What difference does it really make? They might be lying for all I know. But I suspect you just had to go out of your way to paint the commentators here as Neanderthals. Yeah. That's us. Sigh.
In any event, you would not know this because you don't read this site (but are sure are content to label it) - I speak up for women who are falsely accused, too. I suspect you do not because somehow that would interfere with the "greater good" of insisting that rape is rampant; that most men don't give a damn about women raped; and that one-in-four Freshmen college women before Thanksgiving are raped (yeah, as inane as that is, we've actually seen your sacrosanct one-in-four number described in that absurdly insulting manner, and in countless other bizarre ways).
All of it is bullshit, designed to foment a victim mentality that is, to use your word, "counterproductive."
In any event, you've unfairly stereotyped this website. I don't moderate comments so don't confuse my views with commentators. Equity feminism as practiced by people like Christina Hoff Sommers has achieved many great things for women. (I suspect you have no respect for equity feminism, despite all it has done for your gender.) But if you'd examine this site closely (and you won't), you will see that our goal is not to bash women -- and it's certainly not to denigrate rape victims -- but simply to make the point that the modern mainstream feminist community, which practices a form of gender feminism, has made discussion about an entire class of victims verboten. Your comment is sad testimony to that.
I am of the same mind on the false rape issue as people like Prof. Alan Dershowitz -- and we all know what a Barry Goldwater-conservative he is. So if you think it's "counterproductive" to tell the stories of the falsely accused, to raise awareness about their victimization, first: I really don't care; and second: it's got to be because you want their stories swept under the rug. I can tell you are skeptical about false claims being a problem (e.g., your call for a study, etc.) I wish you didn't feel that way, but our exchange here won't change your mind, I am certain of that. You've already labeled me and this site -- without spending time to actually read it -- and that's the end of the discussion. With no authority beyond her serene ipse dixit, No. 25 has declared us not worthy of being part of the public discourse on these issues.
Instead of broadside attacks and accusations, tell me with specificity where I am wrong. Tell me how I am unfair to your movement. Feminism is concerned with rape victims. Feminism is not concerned about the falsely accused. That is a fact -- please tell me how I am wrong in feeling that way.
I, on the other hand, am concerned about rape victims and think the rape shield laws and other changes have been largely good (and we also need to shorten the time between accusation and trial -- for the sake of accusers and the presumed innocent). But tell me one thing the feminists have ever done to show concern for the countless men and boys falsely accused. Hell, you have some feminists who don't want false accusers even charged with a crime! How on earth is that a good thing -- for anybody? And they've done other things to hurt the falsely accused.
As for your suggestion about doing a "new study" -- first of all, no study has ever proven one-in-four. Nor could it. And, yes, I'd love to partner with a feminist to commission a study to instill greater objective truth into rape and false rape claims. The problem is this: a feminist icon named Eugene Kanin did the most extensive false rape study ever conducted -- studying a Midwestern city for nine years -- and, in the city he used as his microcosm, he found that 41% of the claims were not merely false but actually recanted. People like you have attacked that study, frankly, for reasons that can only fairly be called irrational. You see, they just didn't like the result. (I don't either -- but I accept it is true.) So I doubt that any study would ever be accepted in your community.
I will always be happy to talk specifics but what I'm getting from your comment is that you simply don't like the fact that we publicize the fact the victimization of falsely accused men and boys.
Sorry, I wish I could change it.
"Why not spend your time trying to launch or fund—maybe even in conjunction with feminists—a new study to determine the prevalence of rape?"
Any idiot can see that feminists would not want to do, or take part in, such a study. Why? Because they know the results will not come out the way they want.
Archivist,
Thanks for your great work and your most often very pinpoint accurate and thoughtful comments. Keep it up!
Just one thing I'd like to add: please, under no circumstances should you monitor the comments!
Why?
Whatever your point is, it will only get full-fledged acceptance if you submit it to the freedom of opinion and opposition. If you can still defend it, you can make a much bigger impact.
I'm talking from experience - I regularly post on diestandard.at, which is a radical feminist sister publication of an Austrian mainstream newspaper. They have a forum, but it is heavily moderated, including flat out censorship of "deviating" opinions and account blocking. This, of course, generates both backlash and backfire, greatly undermining the credibility and perceived value of the published contents. And this is why I keep posting there despite the obvious propaganda policy of this pamphlet - to demonstrate the unbearable bias and moral bankrupcy of diestandard.at and its censorship antics. And my ordeal has already shown an impact, as specific episodes of particularly blatant censorship of my comments have been brought up and discussed on other boards by other posters, so the word is spreading further.
What I am trying to say here is: censorship only proves that your point of view can not prevail the test of free debate. On the other hand if you pass it, then you can have a much stronger and founded impact.
And I sincerely hope you do not want this blog to become an echo chamber. Free speech is the essence of a fruitful debate. Please do leave it this way.
Thank you.
Post a Comment