12
   

Is this really considered rape?

 
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:08 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:

Just to be clear this for instance includes a guy leaving a message on your voice mail that you did not want. It also includes him asking one too many times (which might be one time) to do something sexual with you.


If the statistics are almost equal for both genders
Quote:
Approximately 1 in 20 women and men (5.6% and 5.3%, respectively) experienced sexual violence other than rape

Why are you reacting as though this is a finding targeting men as abusers? It clearly doesn't. Those statistics you cited are equal for both genders.
Quote:
Dont look to deeply into how the government/feminist cooperative comes up with their numbers unless you have a strong stomach.

Your feminist/conspiracy paranoia is now working overtime.

http://www.howardforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=84281&d=1345911106
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:13 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
Why are reacting as though this is a finding targeting men as abusers?


I am sorry that I was not more clear: I am acting like this " finding" is garbage, by design, which becomes clear when one looks at the questions that were actually asked.
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:18 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I am acting like this " finding" is garbage, by design...


So, you don't believe that an equal percentage of males and females experience sexual violence other than rape?
Quote:
Approximately 1 in 20 women and men (5.6% and 5.3%, respectively) experienced sexual violence other than rape...

Are you now denying that men experience sexual violence in their lives?

What's the problem, Hawkeye--that finding doesn't fit in with your paranoid feminist/government conspiracies? Laughing

http://www.howardforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=84281&d=1345911106
hawkeye10
 
  0  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:23 pm
@firefly,
I scanned the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey for the words "defined" and " definition".

Zero.

This report is garbage. They use phrases like " Contact Sexual Violence" over and over but they never define the words. The words mean what ever they want them to mean and they aint telling.


GARBAGE!
firefly
 
  2  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:37 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:

GARBAGE!


You of course have an extensive educational background in survey construction and statistical measurement that enables you to evaluate extensive studies of this type. Laughing
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 04:45 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You of course have an extensive educational background in survey construction and statistical measurement that enables you to evaluate extensive studies of this type


Not required. Lack of basic transparency should always be taken as being on purpose and with the intent to manipulate. While I only trained as a engineer and not a scientist I have enough familiarity with science to know that if terms are not defined nothing said after this refusal has any value, no matter how good the words sound, no matter how many pages are written.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 05:00 pm
Quote:
Washington Post reporter Erik Wemple interviewed Post-Dispatch editorial page editor Tony Messenger, who said he made the decision after seeing "the reaction and intensity of the hurt" of readers and people on social media to Will's column.


http://mediamatters.org/blog/2014/06/19/backlash-against-george-wills-offensive-rape-co/199797

If an editorial page is doing its job it is offending large numbers of people every day. These boys and girls may as well close up shop, they are lost.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 05:10 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
I scanned the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey for the words "defined" and " definition".

Zero.


Schmuck--they defined their terms. They are quite clear about what they are measuring. Don't confuse your abysmal ignorance with their methodology.
Quote:
The National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey: An Overview

What is the National Intimate Partner and Sexual
Violence Survey?

The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention’s (CDC) National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) assesses experiences of intimate partner violence (IPV), sexual violence (SV), and stalking among adult women and men in the United States.

What makes NISVS unique?

NISVS is the first ongoing survey dedicated solely to describing and monitoring these forms of violence as public health issues. It also includes information that has not previously been measured in a nationally representative survey, such as types of sexual violence other than rape, expressive psychological aggression and coercive control, and control of reproductive or sexual health. NISVS is also the first survey to provide national and state level data on IPV, SV, and stalking.

Why was NISVS developed?
With the ultimate goal of stopping violence before it occurs, the CDC developed ISVS to better describe and monitor the magnitude of IPV, SV, and stalking in the United States. Timely and reliable data on these forms of violence can be used to inform policies and programs, establish priorities at the national, state, and local levels, and, over time, to track progress in preventing these forms of violence.


The primary objectives of NISVS are to describe:
• The prevalence and characteristics of IPV, SV, and stalking;
• Who is most likely to experience these forms of violence;
• The patterns and impact of the violence experienced by specific perpetrators; and
• The health consequences of these forms of violence.

NISVS collects lifetime and 12-month prevalence data on IPV, SV, and stalking, as well as information on the age at the time of the first victimization, demographic characteristics of both respondents and perpetrators, and detailed information about the patterns and impact of the violence.

Methodology
How are NISVS data collected?
NISVS is an ongoing, random digit dial telephone survey conducted in all 50 states and the District of Columbia. Data are collected throughout the year. To ensure cell phone-only households areincluded in the sample, interviews are conducted both by landline and cell phone.

The survey has been designed to be consistent with the way victims recall experiences of violence—all behaviors are linked to a specific perpetrator and all questions are asked within the context of that perpetrator. In this way, NISVS is able to measure the following:
• Patterns of violence, including:
- the forms of violence experienced by a specific perpetrator;
- whether multiple forms of violence were experienced;
- severity of violence;
- duration of the victimization; and
- frequency of the victimization.
• The impact of violence by each perpetrator such as being fearful or needing medical care.

How does NISVS measure intimate partner violence, sexual violence, and
stalking victimization?

The survey asks approximately 60 questions to assess IPV, SV, and stalking over the lifetime and during the 12 months prior to the interview. Instead of using general terms like “abuse” or “rape” that might have different meanings to different people or be stigmatizing, respondents are asked about specific behaviors. For example, physical violence measures include behaviors such as slapping, kicking, and choking. Rape is assessed with specific questions such as the number of times someone used physical force or threats to make you have vaginal sex.

What are the limitations of
the NISVS methodology?
NISVS relies on self-reported data. Despite efforts to make respondents feel comfortable and safe, it is possible that some victims are unable or unwilling to talk to an interviewer. Other victims,particularly those who were victimized a long time ago, may not remember some experiences.
Although NISVS includes a large sample size, in some cases statistically reliable estimates for all forms of violence among all populations and sub-populations are not able to be calculated from annual data.

How does NISVS measure…

Intimate Partner Violence
Five types of IPV, also called violence by an intimate partner, are measured in NISVS. These include SV, physical violence, stalking, psychological aggression, and control of reproductive/sexual health.

Sexual violence includes rape, being made to penetrate someone else, sexual coercion, unwanted sexual contact, and non-contact unwanted sexual experiences. See below.

Physical violence includes a range of behaviors from slapping, pushing, or shoving to severe acts, such as being beaten, burned, or choked.

Stalking victimization involves a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics used by a perpetrator that is both unwanted and causes fear or safety concerns in the victim. See below.

Psychological aggression includes expressive aggression (such as name calling, insulting, or humiliating an intimate partner) and coercive control, which includes behaviors that are intended to monitor and control or threaten an intimate partner.

Control of reproductive or sexual health includes the refusal by an intimate partner to use a condom. For a woman, it also includes times when a partner tried to get her pregnant when she did not want to become pregnant. For a man, it also includes times when a partner tried to get pregnant when the man did not want her to become pregnant.

Sexual Violence
Five types of sexual violence were measured in NISVS. These include acts of
rape, and types of sexual violence other than rape as defined below.

• Rape is defined as any completed or attempted unwanted vaginal (for women), oral, or anal penetration through the use of physical force 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.

• Sexual coercion is defined as unwanted vaginal, oral, or anal sexual penetration that occurs after a person is pressured in a nonphysical way, such as being worn down by someone who repeatedly asked for sex or showed they were unhappy; feeling pressured by being lied to, being told promises that were untrue, having someone threaten to end a relationship or spread rumors;
and
sexual pressure due to someone using their influence or authority.

• Being made to penetrate someone else 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 or threatened with physical harm, or when the victim was drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.

• Unwanted sexual contact is defined as unwanted sexual experiences involving touch but not sexual penetration, such as being kissed in a sexual way, or having sexual body parts fondled or grabbed.

• Non-contact unwanted sexual experiences are unwanted experiences that do not involve any touching or penetration, including someone exposing their sexual body parts, flashing, or masturbating in front of the victim; someone making a victim show his or her body parts; someone making a victim look at or participate in sexual photos or movies; or someone harassing the victim in a public place in a way that made the victim feel unsafe.


Stalking

Stalking victimization involves a pattern of harassing or threatening tactics
used by a perpetrator that is both unwanted and causes fear or safety concerns in the victim. For the purposes of this report, a person was considered a stalking victim if they experienced multiple stalking tactics or a single stalking tactic multiple times by the same perpetrator and felt very fearful, or believed that they or someone close to them would be harmed or killed as a result of the perpetrator’s behavior. Examples of stalking tactics measured include unwanted phone calls or emails, watching or following from a distance, and leaving strange or potentially threatening items for the victim to find.
http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/cdc_nisvs_digest_final-a.pdf


Sorry, paranoid one, there is no evidence of a feminist/government conspiracy in this ongoing massive data collection. and it's clear what they are measuring, they do define their terms, and there is no reason to assume the data they are obtaining is not valid.

"GARBAGE" more accurately describes your posts.

You always wind up making yourself look like a fool.
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 06:10 pm
@firefly,
all of which is meaningless because the stuff that gets reported to us is such as "contact sexual violence" which when we look in the small print includes " other unwanted sexual contact". It also includes " alcohol and drug facilitated contact" what ever the **** that means. And so on and so on. What we have here is unwanted sexual contact being reported as contact sexual violence, what we have is language trickery to make it appear that there is an abuser when we dont know that their was an abuser. We dont know that there was a victim either, but obviously the feminist/state cooperative is determined to pretend otherwise.


There is plenty of lipstick on this pig, but at the end of the day it is still a pig.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 07:14 pm
@hawkeye10,
Blah, blah, blah...

I have no trouble, at all, understanding the terms they are using, or what they refer to, or why they are included. They are collecting comprehensive data, from both adult men and adult women, on all types of intimate partner violence and sexual violence, regarding both physical and psychological aggression, they might have experienced.

But, since you obviously have admitted difficulty comprehending what is really a quite simple to understand massive ongoing data collection, you really should refrain from offering your opinions on it, because you continue to make yourself look willfully ignorant and extremely foolish. If you can't even understand what they are doing, or why they are asking certain questions, and why they are gathering this experiential data, your opinions about it are rather worthless.

This alleged "feminist/state cooperative" should really be applauded for trying to gather substantial data about intimate partner violence, and sexual violence, and stalking, as experienced by men. And, had you any true concern for men's rights, and for decreasing the amount of violence experienced by men, and for the importance of providing adequate support services to male victims of intimate partner violence and sexual violence, and for implementing public policy measures to address such violence toward men, you'd be aware of that. We need the data to fully understand the scope of the problem as it affects men in the general population.

Intimate partner violence and sexual violence, including both physical and psychological forms of aggression, is considered a public health problem by the CDC. You don't seem to understand that at all.

Unfortunately, your paranoia about a "feminist/state cooperative" is severely distorting your perception of this data collection endeavor. Either you'd rather cling to your conspiracy theory than admit you are wrong, or you are so enmeshed in your feminist conspiracy paranoia you really believe you are right. It doesn't really matter which--either way you're coming across as an ignorant whacko who admits he can't understand a rather straight-forward data collection that is surveying both men and women on a continuously ongoing basis.

I hope you keep stocking up on tin foil. You never know where in the government those "feminists" might be lurking. Laughing

.
http://www.howardforums.com/attachment.php?attachmentid=84281&d=1345911106
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 08:38 pm
@firefly,
Blah, blah, blah.....


It the end of the day this study tries to equate someone being the victim of rape-rape with getting forced to listen to the first three seconds of a voicemail that they did not want to receive. I have no trouble understanding where the folks driving this bus are trying to go.
0 Replies
 
maxdancona
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 08:41 pm
@firefly,
I am going to leave this thread to Hawkeye and Firefly. They are on different sides of this argument I don't really care about any more, but they are both arguing about the same, and I don't agree with either one.

In terms of style I am having trouble telling them apart. But it seems like they are both having fun, so I will let them at it.

It would be nice to be able to have a reasonable discussion on these topics with someone.
Finn dAbuzz
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 09:46 pm
@maxdancona,
There has been a reasonable discussion. There may not have been enough agreement with your arguments for you to find it reasonable, but it was there.
0 Replies
 
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Thu 19 Jun, 2014 11:28 pm
@maxdancona,
Quote:
It would be nice to be able to have a reasonable discussion on these topics with someone.

I see absolutely no indication you are interested in a "reasonable discussion" of these topics that is free of your own personal bias. You seem to be seeking agreement with your views rather than discussion of issues.

You started from the assumption that the campus sexual assault problem has been grossly exaggerated, and you've dismissed almost all data gathering surveys and studies done over the last 30 years, with rather consistent findings that contradict your suppositions, as being "propaganda" and "politically biased"--citing absolutely no evidence to support that rather preposterous view of a considerable body of work, by a rather large and diverse group of highly regarded university and government researchers, who simply gather and report data.

I in no way find a discussion of this topic "fun"--there is nothing at all amusing to me about the very real issue of sexual assault, either on our college campuses, in our larger society, or on the global stage. Nor will trying to trivialize the problem, or denying it by calling it "propaganda", stop such crimes from occurring.

I am anti-sexual assault, as our current state laws define sexual assaults, and I want to see those state sexual assault laws upheld and enforced so they will have deterrent value. That is the only "side" I am on.

Personally, I do not believe that colleges should be investigating and adjudicating crimes, particularly those considered felonies, which really belong in our law enforcement/criminal justice system. Neither the victims of sexual assault, nor those accused of such acts, seem particularly well served by the manner in which these issues are addressed on campuses. Sexual assaults are not just violations of a school's code of conduct, they are also serious violations of state laws--violations of law that also deserve more serious punishments than just getting kicked off a campus.

I think colleges have a role to play in educating students about the sexual assault laws, dispelling common rape myths, encouraging bystander intervention to prevent sexual assaults, encouraging the reporting of sexual assaults to the police, dealing with sexist attitudes and sexual harassment on campus, etc. But investigating and adjudicating serious crimes is something best left to the professionals in our criminal justice system.

The main benefit I see to the current White House initiative to address campus sexual assaults is that it represents yet another step in moving the problem of sexual assault from being "a women's issue" to a matter of government concern as it pertains to the reporting of crimes on campuses. And that really is the appropriate way the topic should be addressed--from the perspective of crime. This isn't about a gender war, it isn't about going after men, it's about trying to prevent and deter crimes of sexual assault in the relatively enclosed environment of a college campus, something that has a lot more to do with student safety than it does with anything else.







0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2014 12:35 am
from back in 2000 before the feminists completely strangled dissent inside the government....This from Janet Reno's Justice Department

Quote:
The sexual victimization of college students has emerged as a controversial issue, pitting feminist scholars who claim that the sexual victimization of women is a serious problem against conservative commentators who claim that such victimization is rare and is mostly a fictitious creation of ideologically tainted research. THe research here undoubtedly will not settle the this debate; battle lines are solidly entrenched and how the data is interpreted will, to a degree, lie in the "eye of the beholder".



Under conclusions, page 30

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdf

firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2014 04:18 pm
@hawkeye10,
What's changed, considerably, since 2000, is that this debate is no longer a controversial issue between "feminist scholars" and "conservative commentators".

An additional 13 years of research, with ongoing improvements in methodology, has confirmed that sexual assaults on campus continue to be an ongoing problem of crime that is not adequately addressed, and it is no longer a handful of "feminist scholars" who consider it a serious problem, it's now something that's considered an urgent concern at the highest levels of our government.

What hasn't changed is the fact that conservative commentators, like George Will, are still trying to promote the fiction that the problem doesn't exist, and that claims of sexual assault convey such a "coveted" and "privileged" status on those making such assertions, that it encourages women to see themselves as victims, which falsely inflates the sexual assault numbers reported. The old white conservative guys just never quit trying to define for women what they consider "legitimate rape". And now they've sunk to promoting the rather offensive notion that a sexual assault victim enjoys a "coveted" and "privileged" status. I really wonder if George Will would feel that way about himself, if he were the victim of a sexual assault by another man. Would he feel "privileged" to be in that position?

There is absolutely no evidence to support your claim that "feminists completely strangled dissent inside the government"--if anything, the Republican party in Congress continues to espouse a war on women, and women's interests, and it is the Republican conservative stance on issues important to women, particularly younger women, that continues to necessitate a loud activist voice in protest--not just from "feminists" but from the Democrats, both male and female, who also hold elected office. There is plenty of dissent being expressed within our government.

Women are still a long way from being equally represented in Congress, or state legislatures, or in any of the other halls of government power and influence. Women make up 51% of the population, but hold less than 20% of elected offices in America. When that gap shrinks more considerably, specific advocacy on behalf of women may no longer be necessary, but that day has not yet come.

What does seem to have changed somewhat since 2000, largely due to the growth of the internet and the social media, is that when conservative columnists, like George Will, try to peddle their negative views of women, and try to promote rape denial, there is an immediate, and very loud, backlash voiced about the offensive nature of such remarks--and it no longer comes from a handful of academic "feminist scholars", it comes from a considerably broader base of voters that cannot be easily dismissed.

If you really expect women to just shut up and stop complaining about sexism, or mistreatment, or sexual assault, you'd better not hold your breath. Women have found their voice, and they're using it. While "feminists" have been able to help bring that about, they are hardly the only voices of protest you have been hearing.

In your particular case, your obsessive focus on the alleged "feminist/government" conspiracy simply becomes a handy strawman so you don't have to focus on the campus sexual predators--about 6--8% of the male campus population, and who tend to be repeat offenders who commit an average of 6 rapes each. That's the group that drives the sexual assault numbers up, and that's the group that has to be targeted in sexual assault prevention, including better reporting of their illegal acts. Without such intervention, this group remain the "undetected rapists" on a college campus. And, by failing to fully acknowledge the problem of campus sexual assault, you help this group to continue to commit rapes with impunity.
Quote:
The Sexual Experiences Survey (SES; Koss & Oros, 1982) is the most widely-used self administered instrument for measuring sexual aggression against adults. The SES, and instruments based on it (e.g., Koss & Gaines, 1993; Lisak, Conklin, Hopper, Miller, Altschuler, & Smith, 2000) are comprised of behaviorally-specific questions describing sexual acts that approximate the legal definitions of rape, attempted rape, and sexual
assault. However, to avoid evoking defensive reactions in participants, it does so without referencing any of those legal terms...

Of the 1,882 men in the total sample, 120 (6.4%) met criteria for rape or attempted rape.
A majority of these men, 80.8%, reported committing rapes of women who were incapacitated because of drugs or alcohol; 17.5% reported using threats or overt force in attempted rapes; 9.2% reported using threats or overt force to coerce sexual intercourse; and 10% reported using threats or overt force to coerce oral sex.
http://www.davidlisak.com/wp-content/uploads/pdf/RepeatRapeinUndetectedRapists.pdf

So, based on self-reports, we have 80% this group of sexual predators admitting to acts, which would legally be considered rapes, with victims who were incapacitated by drugs or alcohol. That finding should help to alter views about allegedly consensual "drunken sex", and it should help to reinforce the credibility of women who report such sexual assaults, because these are admissions of acts, legally considered rapes, by the perpetrators. Alcohol is quite simply the most widely used date rape drug, and a sexual predator will either urge the continued consumption of alcohol on a potential victim, or they will target an already drunk, severely intoxicated, vulnerable female.

On campuses, these sexual predators have a sense of entitlement to a woman's body, regardless of her diminished state of awareness to knowingly consent to a sexual act, or her diminished ability to resist or protest such acts, due to her incapacitation by drugs or alcohol. They are often found grouped in certain fraternities or athletic teams, where the males reinforce such attitudes of entitlement in each other, and sexual predation may become the acceptable group norm.

Only to the extent that other men, outside of this group, either witness sexual predators targeting their victims, or hear them boasting of their sexual assaults, and do nothing to speak up or intervene, do they become complicit in the problem due to their passivity. While females can, and do, complain about the problem of sexual assault, it's really males who can do more to curb it, by attacking the sense of male entitlement, on the part of some men, that underlies the problem.

Too often, in discussions of this topic, the response from many men is a defensive "that's not me", and a resentment that responsibility for sexual assaults falls mainly on men, and a resentment that all men seem to be regarded with suspicion, and the conversation ends there. The conversation shouldn't stop there. Just saying "that's not me" really isn't enough if one really does know who those sexual predators are and how they operate. It requires pointing fingers at them, denouncing their predatory tactics and acts, and teaching one's sons and younger brothers not to be like that, by all of the men who truly aren't like that, and it's the overwhelming majority of men who really aren't like that small group of sexual predators.

So when men become equally vocal to the females in protesting the amount of sexual assault that continues to occur, I'll know we have arrived at some state of real equality, including in our ability to trust each other. Until then, those "feminists" you dread are probably needed to spearhead and organize efforts to diminish sexual assault crimes, and all your paranoia about them won't change a thing. It's the sexual predators who create the problem for everyone, and that's who you should be going after.








hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2014 04:41 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
An additional 13 years of research, with ongoing improvements in methodology, has confirmed that sexual assaults on campus continue to be an ongoing problem of crime that is not adequately addressed, and it is no longer a handful of "feminist scholars" who consider it a serious problem, it's now something that's considered an urgent concern at the highest levels of our government.
Which has gone into partnership with the feminists and who therefore could be expected to fall into line with their opinion on this matter. In any case I have seen enough lies and incompetence from this government to not put much faith in their determinations.

Obviously those on the Right that Will talks with have not altered their opinion that the studies on campus sexual abuse are junk science, so I have no reason to think that those on the right have become convince over the last decade that the feminists are right.

Quote:
you don't have to focus on the campus sexual predators--about 6--8% of the male campus population, and who tend to be repeat offenders who commit an average of 6 rapes each.
That is a hoot...it is extremely unlikely that the real number is even .06-.08% of the male campus population.
firefly
 
  1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2014 05:32 pm
@hawkeye10,
Quote:
Obviously those on the Right that Will talks with have not altered their opinion that the studies on campus sexual abuse are junk science

And they also probably haven't altered the opinion, they share with George Will, that climate change doesn't really exist, and assertions to the contrary are also based on junk science. You're not talking about people with much capacity to face reality Laughing

Could you please name 5 prominent feminists whose views have gained such an alleged stranglehold on the government. I really think it's time we knew who the hell you are talking about. If these "feminists" have such extraordinary influence, surely you should be able to name at least 5 of them, along with citing their specific views.
JTT
 
  -1  
Reply Fri 20 Jun, 2014 05:45 pm
@firefly,
Quote:
You're not talking about people with much capacity to face reality


Ground control to Space Cadet first class Firefly.
0 Replies
 
hawkeye10
 
  1  
Reply Sat 21 Jun, 2014 08:13 pm
Quote:
By now you've either heard about or read George Will's controversial column on the issue of sexual assault on college campuses. Will's take is that the numbers are "preposterous" and using "simple arithmetic" he can prove the "supposed campus epidemic of rape" just ain't so. Worse, Will believes that progressivism, the Obama administration, a college hook-up culture and shady math are turning survivors of sexual assault into a "coveted status that confers privilege." He goes on to claim that efforts to address the issue on campuses is "making everyone hypersensitive, even delusional, about victimizations."
I'd no more want to have a conversation with George Will about sexual assault on college campuses than I wish to discuss racism with Donald Sterling. Both men are shockingly out of touch with reality.


Well, either that or you are out of touch with reality. A conversation with the debate of facts could help get to the bottom of who is wrong.

Quote:
The fact is, George Will is so wrong.
no, your opinion is that Will is so wrong.

Quote:
But let's do this: What if we say there are "only" one in 20 women who are sexually assaulted, rather than one in five? Does that make this problem less of a problem?

well yes, using generally accepted logic, yes it does!

Quote:
Actually, it's George Will who's trivializing the problem. When he summarizes a single story of sexual assault with a giant incredulous eye roll and suggests that a woman's conduct should be scrutinized more than a man's in assessing whether a sexual assault even occurred -- he is trivializing a creepy and criminal act.
actually what he said is that women's conduct should be considered if we want to be fair about looking at the situation. But when you say that being concerned for justice trivializes sexual sexual assault you are off your rocker. What it does is put some limits on the creation of victims, it demand that potential abusers be fairly judged. In a business that depends upon there being lots of victims to minister too I can understand your concern.

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/21/opinion/robbins-campus-sexual-assaults/index.html?hpt=hp_t3
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

T'Pring is Dead - Discussion by Brandon9000
Another Calif. shooting spree: 4 dead - Discussion by Lustig Andrei
Friends don't let friends fat-talk - Discussion by hawkeye10
Before you criticize the media - Discussion by Robert Gentel
Fatal Baloon Accident - Discussion by 33export
The Day Ferguson Cops Were Caught in a Bloody Lie - Discussion by bobsal u1553115
Robin Williams is dead - Discussion by Butrflynet
 
Copyright © 2020 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.04 seconds on 09/24/2020 at 09:02:59