Fahran wrote:Ostroeuropa wrote:Firstly, this advice is often packaged with propoganda and lies about rape statistics that erase male victims and demonize men.
The CDC statistics on sexual violence do not make any serious effort to erase male victims or demonize men and largely align with the common feminist narratives regarding the sexual victimization of women. The fundamental assertion of relevance in our conversation is that 1 in 5 women will experience rape or attempted rape in her life time. The CDC seems to use a more technical definition of rape as involving penetration and concludes that 1 in 38 men will experience rape or attempted rape in his life time. However, importantly, the CDC also includes the statistic that 1 in 3 women and 1 in 4 men will experience sexual violence involving physical contact.
The CDC linked to the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: 2015 Data Brief and by going through the presented data we get a little more elucidation on the statistics and the methodologies employed to obtain them, including a definition of rape that likely is similar to the one employed by the CDC. The survey defines rape as:Any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal (for women), oral, or anal penetration through the use of physical force (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threats to physically harm and includes times when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent. Rape is separated into three types: completed forced penetration, attempted forced penetration, and completed alcohol- or drug-facilitated penetration. Among women, rape includes vaginal, oral, or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes vaginal or anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object. Among men, rape includes oral or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object.
Your initial thought regarding the definition is likely the same as mine - it seems discriminatory and meant to suggest that women are more likely to be victimized when that's not necessarily the case. Then we get to the interesting part.Includes times when the victim was made to, or there was an attempt to make them, sexually penetrate someone without the victim’s consent because the victim was physically forced (such as being pinned or held down, or by the use of violence) or threatened with physical harm, or when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent. Among women, this behavior reflects a female being made to orally penetrate another female’s vagina or anus or another male’s anus. Among men, being made to penetrate someone else could have occurred in multiple ways: being made to vaginally penetrate a female using one’s own penis; orally penetrating a female’s vagina or anus; anally penetrating a male or female; or being made to receive oral sex from a male or female. It also includes male and female perpetrators attempting to force male victims to penetrate them, though it did not happen.
The survey then reports that 1 in 5 women experienced rape or attempted rape, matching the CDC statistic, and, additionally, that 1 in 14 men are forced or coerced into engaging in penetration against their will. When we combine rape and forced to penetrate statistics, 22.5% of women will be victimized and 9.7% of men will be victimized. This means women are about 2.3 times more likely to experience rape even defining it in the most inclusive terms. Around 43% of women experience contact sexual violence at some point. Around 25% of men experience contact sexual violence at some point. The fact that terms have clear definitions in this survey serves to minimize as much as can be expected the problem of men not reporting their victimization.
The last serious objection I can countenance for the survey is the sampling bias, specifically with regard to sexual victimization among poor, non-white men under the age of twenty five. Lara Staple's study The Sexual Victimization of Men in America: New Data Challenge Old Assumptions places especial emphasis on the criminal justice system, juvenile detention facilities, and prisons and how the exclusion of inmates might skew statistics. This is extremely relevant given that an estimated 9% of American men will be incarcerated at some point during their lives. The study in question is a bit dated and largely critiques CDC studies from 2010-2012. The data I borrowed from the CDC is from 2015 and addresses a few of the gripes.
Importantly, for adult prison populations, we can observe that a significant portion of the victimization doesn't come from prison staff but, rather, from other inmates. This is true for both men and women. In juvenile populations, however, we observe that boys are more likely to be victimized by staff whereas girls are more likely to be victimized by fellow inmates. The difference here is quite stark owing to the fact that men and boys are far more likely to be incarcerated. That said, the occurrence of sexual violence remains in many ways gendered - even or especially when it occurs in this context.
Staple even goes so far as to conclude:Finally, a gender-conscious analysis of sexual victimization as it affects both women and men is needed and is not inconsistent with a gender-neutral approach to defining abuse. Indeed, masculinized dominance and feminized subordination can take place regardless of the biological sex or sexual orientation of the actors. We therefore advocate for the use of gender-conscious analyses that avoid regressive stereotyping, to which both women and men are detrimentally subject. This includes an understanding of how gender norms can affect the sexual victimization of all persons.
She's not stating that we need a gender neutral approach, but rather that we need to dispense with the antiquated agent-object dichotomy and regressive stereotypes. Even in cases of same-sex sexual violence, power dynamics and gender remain important considerations in understanding these criminal behaviors. As a slight aside, I think Staple exaggerates the problematic nature of the disparity in the CDC data a bit given the occurrence of victimization among inmate populations cannot possibly bridge the disparity I referenced earlier between the occurrence of rape where men are victims (including where they're forced to penetrate the perpetrator) and where women are victims. Rather, Staple's argument is to mute that disparity somewhat and give us more accurate picture of sexual victimization among men in particular.
In conclusion, a lot of the commonly cited figures regarding the sexual victimization of women seem accurate, especially when the studies give us their definitions and methodologies. I don't think accusing researchers of lying in a generalized way is accurate, especially not when peer challenges exist in the form of studies and articles critical of one another's findings.Ostroeuropa wrote:Secondly, if avoiding those pitfalls, it is subtly packaged the same way through linking rape to patriarchy and male domination, carrying the implication it is rooted in male mentalities and a desire to control women.
Sexual violence, even in instances where men are both the perpetrators and the victims, does seem rooted in patriarchal power dynamics since it often serves, especially in the context of incarcerated populations, to assert dominance over the victimized person. That said, while I cannot get a precise statistic on the breakdown by gender of perpetrators who victimize men, the numbers seem to imply that women are more likely to victimize men than men are to victimize men on the whole. It's quite probable that female perpetrators of sexual violence operate in a distinct psychological way to male perpetrators.
Studies can offer us a broad profile of the sorts of men who engage in sexual violence among the general population. A sense of entitlement, narcissism, peer pressure to pursue sexual conquests, lack of empathy, acceptance of rape myths, and negative or derogatory attitudes towards women are all risk factors that predispose young men to sexually aggressive behaviors. Since women are socialized differently, the social pressures and mental processes might function a little differently - though lack of empathy, acceptance of rape myths, narcissism, and negative attitudes towards men might still be present. The main difference would be the pressure to pursue sexual conquests in my view, but, again, I'd need better studies to corroborrate that suspicion.
I do think a decent portion of male-perpetrated sexual violence is linked to patriarchy, male domination, and the way men and boys are socialized. Interviews with rapists living out in the general population and observances of prison populations seem to corroborrate rather than refute that assertion. The question here isn't whether that argument is correct or not, but how it reflects on the psychology and behavior of those who engage in female-perpetrated sexual violence. In short, are female rapists different from male rapists in any psychological, sociological, or behavioral respect?Ostroeuropa wrote:Thirdly, discussions of consent do not require feminism to happen and are often better conducted without it. It has nothing of value to contribute, only detriment and distraction from the core principles of consent which should remain the focus of such instruction without distraction from irrelevant bits of information. You don't want people remembering the bit about marital rape that feminists love to bring up (And ignore wives raping husbands) but coming out of the class still confused on how consent works. There's other problems with it too, but those are sufficient I think.
In teaching consent, taking gendered socialization into consideration might serve to improve the effectiveness of the lesson, especially when such lessons are presented in gendered spaces. Teaching consent among fraternity men seems to result in decreases in risk factors that make men susceptible to committing sexual violence and one element of that is the manner in which men are socialized. To give a more anecdotal example, a common refrain among the fraternity to which I'm a sweetheart is "real men don't rape."
Naturally, as we collect more data on female perpetrators of sexual violence, we can tailor such programs to us as well. Dispelling myths about male sexuality in particular strikes me as a worthwhile practice. It's not uncommon for women to believe that men are ALWAYS interested in sex for instance and that would constitute a so-called rape myth among women in much the same way that "sometimes women play hard to get" constitutes a rape myth among men.
Removing gendered elements from the conversation could significantly impair our ability to address problematic attitudes, beliefs, and behaviors that lead to sexual violence because the assumption is that sexual assailants are an anti-social outlier and/or that they all have the same fundamental psychology and motivations. We have no evidence to actually suggest that at the moment and quite a bit to suggest that the opposite might in fact be true.
I've addressed this argument in an earlier thread.
You are arguing over *lifetime statistics*.
Please review the yearly statistics which show parity between men and women in terms of rape perpetration and victimization.
This is important for a number of reasons.
Policy and discussion should revolve around *current dynamics*. We do not need to endlessly talk about the need to tax the landed gentry because we have a ridiculous set of data stretching chronologically far beyond what is relevant. The statistics will show that men *are raped at the same rate as women, and women rape at the same rate as men.*.
This is separate from "Have been raped".
Once you understand that, you can also begin to understand why these lifetime statistics and even arguing more women "Have been raped" is highly dubious.
Firstly, data becomes less and less reliable the further from the event respondents are being asked to report. When discussing rape figures, *the most recent data is the most relevant and reliable*.
Secondly, Gallo has already previously provided studies showing that men deal with trauma differently to women, and will suppress and forget about it over a number of years at a higher rate than women. (Which suggests that the lifetime figures are too low for both, but significantly too low for men). Thirdly, lifetime figures include a significant number of the older population who are far less likely to have a correct understanding of rape and what it entails, this is crucial as being "forced to penetrate" while not considering it as a sexual assault may well lead to it being forgotten about more rapidly than if one processes what was done to them, and many may not even understand the question.
As for your point on prison populations; that's an extremely valid observation, however, most male prisoners report a female perpetrator (A guard) when it comes to their sexual assault.
This is the problem and why you are engaged in misinformation here:
This means women are about 2.3 times more likely to experience rape even defining it in the most inclusive terms.
You're using *present tense language while discussing lifetime statistics, but present tense stats disagree with you*.
This is an example of feminist misinformation that needs to be corrected.
Men are *As likely to experience rape as women are*. That's a fact. It's one obscured by your misuse of these statistics and you not understanding what they actually say, and this is an extremely common problem with feminists.
Returning to the nobility example, it's like arguing; "The landed gentry are 99.9% more likely to kill someone in a duel than anyone else".
Is that still true? Or is the timescale of your data set ridiculous?
Would having a study showing that actually, they're about as likely to kill anyone in a duel as any other people *in the current year*, stop you saying something so patently ridiculous, or would you still cling to a study measuring 1000 years of human history?
And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).
https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/
Do you get it yet?
So even you, who I consider to be genuinely trying, would have just fucked up and told children a bunch of lies if we let you try and teach them about this stuff. You would have demonized men, made out rape was mostly a male issue, and so on and so on.
You would have taught them to fear men and view them as suspect and to endlessly prattle on about what defect in men causes them to rape more, based on you *immediately latching on to something that confirmed your biases rather than digging deeper*.
You would have taught them "women *are raped* more than men", despite that not being true, and fostered misandry, resentment, and so on.
Do you understand the problem with that?
I don't see why we should have to wait for boomers to all die off for *this* bullshit to finally get resolved too. Are you seriously proposing feminists just ignore the reality in front of them and harken back to the old days when what they were saying might have had actual relevance? Fillibuster society with lifetime stats that get increasingly less and less supportive of their nonsense as the yearly figures continue to tick away at it showing parity, and the whole while in the meantime prattling on about how men are defective somehow and that causes them to rape more and we need to figure out why?
For what? 40 years? 50?
How long do you think that completely unproductive and inane misandry would be justified for? Until everyone over 40 is dead?