1 in 5 women get raped?

@firefly,

You can look this up yourself you know. It is crazy for you to have so much faith in this "1 in 5 number" when you clearly haven't looked at the evidence yourself. Skepticism is healthy, even when it means questioning your own beliefs.

The study is here...

http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss6308a1.htm?s_cid=ss6308a1_e

You can read the design and the analysis (which I found funny since they don't even try to hide their bias). The questionnaire they used (which I have quoted from) is here

http://stacks.cdc.gov/view/cdc/24726

I don't want to do any more of your homework for you.

0 Replies

@firefly,

If anything, The NCVS survey has been criticized for possible underreporting of rapes and sexual assaults.

Quote:

News from the National Academies

Date: Nov. 19, 2013
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

National Crime Victimization Survey Is Likely Undercounting Rape and Sexual Assault; Justice Department Should Create New, Separate Survey

WASHINGTON – One of the nation’s largest surveys of crime victims is likely undercounting incidences of rape and sexual assault, making it difficult to ensure that adequate law enforcement resources and support services are available for victims, says a new report by the National Research Council. To obtain more accurate data, the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) should establish a separate survey for measuring rape and sexual assault.

“Victims of rape and sexual assault sustain devastating injuries, which often extend beyond the initial incident and potentially lead to health- and work-related issues,” said Candace Kruttschnitt, co-chair of the panel that wrote the report and professor of sociology at the University of Toronto. “Understanding the context and frequency with which these crimes occur is essential for informed public health policymaking, providing support to victims, and helping to curtail future attacks.”

Read more here
http://www8.nationalacademies.org/onpinews/newsitem.aspx?RecordID=18605

1 Reply

I have reported at length here about how my brother in law was railroaded with female judge and female lawyer for the child and for the wife and my not being allowed in the courtroom, was shown out, as I might testify.

I do understand male grievance.

I have no interest in saying anything for the 98th time.

The psychiatrist agreed with me, when I called him later, glad to put stuff together which hadn't fitted when he first read.

And then he died.

0 Replies

I have reported at length here about how my brother in law was railroaded with female judge and female lawyer for the child and a female judge for the wife and my not being allowed in the courtroom, was shown out, as I might testify, never called.

I do understand male grievance.

I have no interest in saying anything for the 98th time.

The psychiatrist agreed with me, when I called him, a few weeks later, glad to put stuff together which hadn't fitted when he first read and saw her (she didn't have a clue about an erect penis).
And then he died.

Many years later, as she was failing, the mother told me she was sorry.

0 Replies

@maxdancona,

Quote:

By this standard (repeatedly asking for sex) I am a rape victim.

My fav is that according to this if someone request sex, we say know, and they act "unhappy" about being shot down then we are a victim of sexual assault.

I am actually shocked that the sexual assault rate is not above 90%, for both sexes under this screwed up definition.

0 Replies

@firefly,

Firefly, I get it.

You are going to accept the results of any study that supports your preconceived notions and reject any study that challenges them. I don't think this is a good thing, but what can I do.

I don't defend the results of the NCVS study. It is certainly possible that the results undercount the incidence of rape.

The NCVS is appealing to me because it wasn't politically motivated. They are just trying to answer questions about crime. The study was done scientifically. Part of science is openness to criticism. I bet that any scientist that worked on the NCVS will accept the possibility that the rape cases are underreported.

The issue with the CDC study that it is clearly flawed and that it was politically motivated. They did several things that are unscientific including failing to report the raw data (at least I can't find it).

Read the analysis of the CDC report. It is funny. This section should admit the possible weaknesses of the study meaning the ways the results might not support the preconceptions of the researchers. It does the opposite, manufacturing ways that the researcher's pre-existing beliefs may be more correct than the results suggest.

It is quite possible that both of these studies get it wrong. The point is that spreading a fantastic claim such as "1 in 5 women are raped" without any solid scientific evidence (for or against) is irresponsible, especially given the political power of such a claim.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Quote:

The "1 in 5" figure being thrown around is scientific fiction.

The number is based on a flawed study in many aways.

1. The study was done one time, with no follow up.
2. The sample was taken from a very limited population (students on two college campuses) that was not representative of the society at large.
3. The study had a very low response rate. This greatly increases uncertainty because if people who were assaulted are more likely to respond to the study then the numbers are inaccurate. It isn't unreasonable to think that people who were victimized might be more likely to respond and people who weren't victims would be more likely to ignore it.
4. A woman would be counted as part of the 20% if someone had "rubbed up against her" in a sexual way.

I repeat, again, that none of what you said above, in your opening post, is true.

You weren't referring to either the NCVS or the CDC, and you never identified that alleged single study where you were drawing your bogus, and inaccurate, statements from.

Quote:

You are going to accept the results of any study that supports your preconceived notions and reject any study that challenges them

You're talking about yourself, not about me.

You've yet to provide any study that challenges that 1 in 5 number you came up with--or the 1 in 6 number that RAINN cites (which includes both completed and attempted rapes). In fact, you've yet to provide any studies--you initially claimed you couldn't find any--and then, after I provided you with some, you resorted to pure BS, like claiming the CDC is "politically motivated" to skew their sexual assault statistics, again without providing valid objective information to back that up.

Given the underreporting of rapes and sexual assaults, what we know may only be the tip of the iceberg.

You're the one who started this thread by making false claims and statements. You're the one who should be obligated to defend what you said in your OP.

I'm not going to waste any more time with your nonsense. I have no "preconceived notions" about rape statistics, but you apparently do, even though you can't support your assertions in any way. Starting a thread with lies, as you did, really does nothing for your credibility.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

maxdancona wrote:

Don't you oppress me!

(For the humor impaired, this is a Monty Python reference).

When anyone explains a joke that's like the funniest thing ever.

0 Replies

@firefly,

firefly wrote:

I have no "preconceived notions" about rape statistics, but you apparently do, even though you can't support your assertions in any way. Starting a thread with lies, as you did, really does nothing for your credibility.

You've nailed it. I'm going to start a thread lambasting the worrying statistic that 8 out of 10 Koala Bears have been fisted by George W Bush.

1 Reply

@firefly,

Quote:

You've yet to provide any study that challenges that 1 in 5 number you came up with--or the 1 in 6 number that RAINN cites (which includes both completed and attempted rapes). In fact, you've yet to provide any studies--you initially claimed you couldn't find any--and then, after I provided you with some, you resorted to pure BS, like claiming the CDC is "politically motivated" to skew their sexual assault statistics, again without providing valid objective information to back that up.

Let's get Firefly's first claim out of the way

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221153.pdf

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

Quote:

You've nailed it. I'm going to start a thread lambasting the worrying statistic that 8 out of 10 Koala Bears have been fisted by George W Bush

Start the Koala bear thread Izzy. Firefly might show up to defend the that statistic. I don't mind joining this thread to out that the "8 out of 10 Koala Bears" statistic has no scientific merit.

That's the point Izzy. If you make up a statistic and start throwing it around as truth, it should be challenged. And that is what I am doing in this thread.

There is no valid scientific evidence that Bush fisted 80% of Koala Bears. And there is no well done study, or any other real evidence, that 1 out of 5 women are raped.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

But you made up the statistic.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

Posting a 111 page document in its entirety doesn't get any thing out of the way. What parts of the study do you think back up your claims? It's completely unreasonable to expect people to wade through a document looking for something that may or may not be there because you're too lazy to do it.

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

No Izzy I didn't make the the statistic.

The "1 in 5 women get raped" claim is thrown around as an unquestionable truth all over the place. Just google "1 in 5" if you don't believe me.

I started this thread because it came up in another thread. It was used in the feminist video of cute little girls in princess costumes saying "****" seen at http://able2know.org/topic/257724-1.

I don't like political slogans being treated as unquestionable scientific truth (especially when the science behind the claim is so weak).

1 Reply

@izzythepush,

<<Sign>>

Firefly was complaining that I never posted this document. So I posted it. That is all. I don't have any particular interest in this document. In my opinion it is just another piece of political activism with a very thin veneer of poorly done social science.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

You're the one who came up with this figure, and you've yet to show any example of it being used other than your own. It's not my job to google something to back up ,as yet, unfounded claims you're making.

2 Replies

@maxdancona,

Have you read it?

0 Replies

If you want to change my mind about the CDC study, post a link to the raw data.

I would like to know the actual numbers of people who answered yes to each question rather than their interpretation of these numbers. They are hiding the actual instrument they used to determine which respondents were "rape victims".

It is very frustrating that they apparently haven't published these numbers. If they are available, please post them.

1 Reply

@maxdancona,

You make claims, then you expect everyone else to run around providing links for you. You made the claims, it's down to you to find the sources to back up those claims, otherwise it's just so much hot air.

0 Replies

@izzythepush,

If you don't accept the "1 in 5 women get raped" statistic, then you and I are in agreement. That makes this interaction a little less information.

I read the CDC report in some detail. As I said, their analysis section made me laugh. I spent time looking at their questionnaire and their sampling methodology (I am a science geek). And I spend a bunch of time looking for their raw data.

0 Replies

1 in 5 women get raped?

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know