@engineer,
Engineer, let me appeal to the scientist in you...
Here are the scientific issues if have with the study.
1. The questionnaire (which I have already linked to and which is easy to find) is ambiguous in several ways. They never ask the respondent if they were raped instead asking a bunch of questions that could be misconstrued. Many people in an existing relationship have sex when they are "too drunk to consent" (I may have done this myself on occasion). This does not equal rape. The question about whether someone "bothered you repeatedly" for sex is laughable.
2. I could not find the metric they used to decide if a set of responses constitutes rape. Was there affirmative answers to a set of questions that put the respondent in the "rape victim" column? I couldn't find which questions they used. Can you?
3. The response rate was very low (around 30%). They raised the response rate by offering a $40 inducement to respond. I didn't see where they say what the final response rate way. There is no way to guess how this affected the responses or the overall results.
4. The positive responses for rape were 10 times higher than the NCVS survey. The NCVS survey asks the obvious question -- "Has anyone ever used physical violence or the threat of physical violence" to force you to have sex.
5. The CDC study was commissioned specifically because there was political pressure to find higher numbers.
I am a reasonable guy who responds well to a scientific argument. If anyone could find the raw data (i.e. how many people responded 'yes' to each question) rather than these researchers interpretation of the results, it would go a long way to persuading me.
For example, if near 20% answered 'yes' to any of the "Physical force" question on the questionnaire, I would be surprised... and this would change my mind.
As I said, the "When you were drunk" question is very poorly worded. They want this to represent the times when someone took advantage of the fact a person was drunk to have sex with them (when they wouldn't have wanted to have sex). The question is ambiguous, lot's of of people might answer yes when they were drunk and had consensual sex.
And Engineer, if you step back objectively as an engineer and look at this study, you could easily list a dozen reasons that this number may actually be lower than the results show. The respondents could be skewed (given the low response rate). People could have been trying to please the interviewer (particularly given the financial reward). People could have misunderstood the questions.
Read the "limitations" section... and tell me that it isn't funny.