Monday, September 27, 2010

The lies we are told about rape . . .

The following is an article published this month by Caroline May:

College campus rape rate 10 times higher than Detroit’s? Don’t believe everything the Justice Department tells you

As college students poured back into classrooms this week, ABC Nightline breathlessly reported (and other news outlets and blogs echoed): “A recent study from the Department of Justice estimated that 25 percent of college women will be victims of rape or attempted rape before they graduate within a four-year college period.”

The short statement is enough to make parents think twice before sending their daughter to college. Despite the seriousness of the claim, the hook is riddled with inaccuracies and misrepresentations — not least of which is the actual statistic.

Indeed, nearly 50 percent of the “rape victims” referred to in the report said they had not been raped.

The document in question, “Acquaintance Rape of College Students,” by attorney Rana Sampson, is not a study but rather a report combining and relying on several studies — the largest of which remains problematic.

Sampson released her report more than four years ago and though the Justice Department provided her with some funding, she was not a Justice Department employee. “The opinions contained herein are those of the author(s) and do not necessarily represent the official position of the U.S. Department of Justice,” the report disclaims.

The one-in-four statistic, according to footnotes, is derived from a study conducted in 2000 called, “The Sexual Victimization of College Women” (SVCW), by Bonnie S. Fisher, Francis T. Cullen and Michael G. Turner.

Dr. Neil Gilbert, a professor of social welfare at University California, Berkeley, told The Daily Caller that the SVCW’s numbers are severely inflated due to the study’s broad definition of rape and the manner in which subjects were questioned.

According to Gilbert, the SVCW study results found a rate of rape that was 10 times higher than when the methodology for the National Crime Victimization Study (NCVS) was used. Namely, “the National Crime Victimization study had a check to make sure that the codes [or definitions of rape, force, etc.] of responses reflected the interviewees precise description. The SVCW study did not use this type of control on coding,” Gilbert explained.

In the SVCW study, researchers asked subjects to explain what happened to them and then decided, using their own definitions, what was and was not rape. The study defined rape in exceptionally wide terms: “Forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force. Forced sexual intercourse means vaginal, anal or oral penetration by the offender(s). This category also includes incidents where the penetration is from a foreign object such as a bottle. Includes attempted rapes, male as well as female victims, and both heterosexual and homosexual rape. Attempted rape includes verbal threats of rape.”

The inclusion of the phrase “psychological coercion” as part of the definition greatly increased the number of “victims.”

In an interview with TheDC, Sampson made no distinction between violent rape and regret after seduction. “Rape is rape is rape,” she said. “I think that the kind of harm that one experiences during rape is not something we want to belittle.”

Apart from the hair-raising 25 percent figure, the SVCW study reports that when those categorized as rape victims were asked if what they described was rape, nearly 50 percent said “no.” Further, 80 percent of the subjects researchers labeled as rape victims stated that the incident resulted in neither physical or emotional injuries. Only 5 percent of those identified as victims of rape actually reported the incident. “If an attorney defending a rapist were to use this, they’d say ‘Well, what’s the big deal? 80 percent of women who are raped don’t have any adverse affects,’” Gilbert said.

“It expands the definition in a way that it includes a lot of events — you know sexual activity at that age can be confusing, there is regret after, there are break ups, all kinds of things that go on,” Gilbert said.

But, according to Sampson many women do not actually realized they have been raped. “It often doesn’t register as rape to women because it does not look like the image they have in their mind. It turns out that image is not the most common type of rape and that is why so many people are able to get away with it,” she said.

Manhattan Institute fellow Heather Mac Donald put Sampson’s rape report numbers up against Detroit’s, a city with one of the highest violent crime rates of any city in the country. In that city, at the time of the report’s release, the violent crime rate was 2.4 percent, which includes crimes of rape, murder, assault and robbery.

“If 25 percent of all college women were experiencing a violent crime rate that was 10 times higher than anything experienced in the most violent areas, colleges would be transformed. They would be shut down,” Mac Donald told TheDC. “Parents would not be clamoring to get their daughters into Harvard and Yale and Brown and Wesleyan and every other college. You would have a massive revamping of admissions processes because what this statistic says is that colleges are letting in tens of thousands of violent criminals.”

While reports such as Nightline’s scream about an epidemic, Mac Donald says college rape hotlines are silent. “I mean they are so desperate to find rape that at Yale, for instance, they have thrown out the rule that the accuser has the right to confront his victim, which is a cornerstone of our Anglo-Saxon common law heritage. This is at Yale.”

Gilbert said that the desire to inflate the numbers comes down to funding. “These studies have been used to get funding for women’s centers on college campuses,” Gilbert said. “I call it advocacy research, these people mean well and have legitimate concerns. But at some point they exaggerate so much that it is no longer a problem but the norm and with studies like this they risk doing just that.”

13 comments:

Snark said...

"they are so desperate to find rape"

This says it all. As I've said in the past, feminists love nothing more than a good rape yarn.

Less rape = feminism becomes irrelevant.

So they just invent rapes, expand the definition of rapes, cook up phoney statistics to convince people that rape is an epidemic.

This is why feminism can never stop rape.

It has too much of a vested interest in rape.

Anonymous said...

America has a dark past with rape hysteria, but most of the folks that were around during the last rape hysteria lynchings are no longer around.
History repeats itself, and now its the Gender / Raunch community that will in effect lynch anyone who questions them or their faulty and inflammatory agitation propaganda.
The Gender / raunch community is now so powerful on campuses in America, that heterosexual males feel awkward and out of place.

Anonymous said...

When American law enforcement started getting their hands dirty by working with Gender feminists to in effect "manufacture faulty and inflammatory misinformation" that prejudices against the innocent, that is when they overstepped their authority, and crossed some very real constitutional boundaries.

Anonymous said...

Feminism is not what it was 25 years ago, any sort of "equality for women", is now sidetracked by the homosexual movement and agenda. Womens studies classes are gay rallies, womens domestic abuse shelters in many areas of the country are lesbian crack houses.

An Non said...

Deaf man expected to be exonerated in rape of Richardson, Texas girl

http://www.dallasnews.com/sharedcontent/dws/news/localnews/crime/stories/092810dnmetbrodieadvance.1342e05b9.html


"From Staff and Wire Reports

A deaf man imprisoned for sexual assault of a child, despite a crime-scene fingerprint that matched a convicted child rapist, could have his guilty verdict overturned.

Stephen Brodie is expected to be exonerated during a hearing Monday at the Dallas County Courthouse in Dallas. The county district attorney’s office is supporting the 39-year-old man’s claims of innocence.

Although there was no physical evidence linking Brodie to the 1990 sexual assault of a 5-year-old girl abducted from her Richardson home, Brodie pleaded guilty to the crime in 1993.

His attorney, Michelle Moore, said Brodie was interrogated for 18 hours over eight days and only half of the time was there a sign language interpreter present.

"We believe this is not a true confession," Moore said. " Stephen speaks an entirely differently language."

Moore also said prosecutors failed to notify Brodie's lawyer about forensic testing on hair found at the crime scene excluding him as the source.

After Brodie was convicted, police in the Dallas suburb Richardson learned the fingerprint matched a man who pleaded guilty to the sexual assault of a 15-year-old girl.

Mike Ware, who oversees the conviction integrity unit at the district attorney's office, said there was "no reason" for Brodie to become a suspect in the first place.

"I anticipate part of the proof will be that the person we believe to be the actual perpetrator has been identified," Ware said. "

Arod99k said...

Sex Offender Treatment James D. Anderson
One of the most profitable scams in the prison behavioral modification business is the sex-offender treatment industry. Because you were convicted of a sex offense, you are now fuel for the sex-offender treatment profiteers. You will be expected to confess to your crime, end all appeals for a fair trial, dismiss all delusions of innocence, and participate in sex-offender treatment along with admitted child molesters and serial rapists. Confession is the main tenet of sex-offender treatment. It does not matter to prison officials that you have always maintained your innocence and are in the process of appeal.
Thousands of people work in the sex-offender treatment industry and to justify their high-paying state jobs you must confess to your offense. You are the meal ticket not only of prison guards but also sex-offender treatment providers. As a wrongly convicted prisoner, you should have nothing to do with sex-offender treatment. Be a man, and stand up for what is right. There will be repercussions for you for not confessing and becoming another admitted sex offender. You will be denied any good-time off your prison term and early parole will be out of the question. I have always refused to even speak to sex-offender treatment counselors. Not only have I been denied any time off my sentence for good behavior, but the Oregon Parole Board has labeled me mentally unfit and dangerous to society because I refuse to confess, show remorse, and beg for forgiveness.
Not only should you avoid sex-offender treatment, but I suggest you refuse to participate in any behavior modification programs in prison. Don't admit anything to prison officials or prison counselors. Those who work in the behavior modification industry behind prison walls will use anything you tell them against you. Tell them nothing about your past. Prison counselors are not your friends.
Never talk to any prison psychologist. There is no faster way to be labeled mentally and emotionally unfit than to trust a prison psychologist. As a convicted sex offender, innocent or not, you are the bread and butter of the sex-offender treatment industry, prison counselors/psychologists, and prison guards. The only way they can justify their jobs is to keep you in their prison programs as long as possible. Be aware of their true motives, don't trust them, tell them nothing, and never doubt yourself. You owe them nothing.
You are an innocent man in prison. Act like one, and good luck my friend

Anonymous said...

Revisit the Gene Amirault case.

Innocent people being put through sex offender treatment are doomed to failure anyway. It's a set up. It's not enough that you confess to something you didn't do - ANYone can do that. You have to pass a polygraph as well. If you don't pass the polygraph it's not because you didn't do it, and are being force to lie. It's because you are In DENIAL, therefore TRULY TRULY dangerous.

Next time you are asked to support permanent internment camps for those accused, know you are supporting the possiblilty of an innocent person being forever locked away.

Read about Greg Veeder's THE program in Colorado if you want to lose some sleep tonight. Read about the public's reaction to an official who tried to stop him.

It's time to be afraid. Be Very Afraid.

Anonymous said...

When you talk about sex offender treatment, are you referring to the SOL prison programs?

Anonymous said...

Don't know who you directed this question to, but sex offender treatment is sex offender treatment.

If it's inside prison, you will not get out until you comply.

If it's outside prison, you will be revoked and sent to prison is unable to comply as an innocent person.


Trouble is, you can prove someone has AIDs or any other incurable disease and kpossibly justify locking them away forever, or unitl a cure if found.

You cannot definitively prove you are innocent in sex offense cases. Lack of evidence is no hindrance. No DNA? You wore a condom or used an inanimate object to do the dirty work. The accuser waited years later to accuse? You tramatized her, you dirty bastard, she had to get over her trepidation before coming forward.

Even in 'provable' cases, there are instances where the wrong leg was amputated, or people were "opened up" to find they were disease free(innocent).

Imagine if you could just point a finger at anyone on the street and declare them a dangerous disease carrier, and they are forever locked away on say os only?

That's what has happened in sex accusation cases, and no one is safe.

Anonymous said...

Separatism tactics.

And that's what it is.

Anonymous said...

Sep 27, 2010 7:03:00 PM
Sep 27, 2010 7:08:00 PM
Sep 27, 2010 7:14:00 PM

Stop posting.

Anonymous said...

Sep 28, 2010 10:59:00 AM

You too.

Anonymous said...

Sep 28, 2010 11:51:00 AM

Fine, I'm willing to take one for the team. If it's the only thing that will stop gender/raunch dingus from ruining things for everyone else, I won't post anything either.