|
United States41979 Posts
The significance of the views on rape poll I quoted above is not just "those guys think some weird things". It's a societal and cultural thing. The above respondents are in the jury, they're in the police force, they're doctors, they're lawyers, they're lawmakers and there are an awful, awful lot of them. In this case linked earlier (http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/articles/38671/test-case-youre-not-a-rape-victim-unless-police-say/full/) the victim was denied access to a rape kit in her local hospital because the policeman dismissed her as being confused on the basis of a phone interview, despite physical injury resulting from sexual activities which she could not remember. They come up with media like this + Show Spoiler +, reinforcing the view that the responsibility for preventing rape is on the victims rather than for the rapists to not rape people. You've got US Senators saying "when I were a lad rape was when a chaste (ie not promiscuous) was forced by a man other than her husband" (paraphrasing Douglas Henry).
When people see surveys like that about 95% think "I don't think women are solely responsible for their rape in all situations except a random chaste woman who gets raped in the kitchen in my home invasion fantasy and nor do any of my friends" and yet when you anonymously poll people, not only do 5% answer that the blame is exclusively on the victim but 6% will confess to having raped people (as long as the word rape is not used http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/). There is this projection on a vast scale where this is a problem that impacts people outside of our little bubble, that nobody really thinks that and we shouldn't have to talk about it and being confronted with it is totally unreasonable because I know I'm not a rapist. It's an absurdity, a nonsense, a complete myth, even if you somehow managed to avoid being a casual acquaintance with a single rapist (very unlikely), who do you think they're all raping? You almost certainly know a victim.
The safe bubble you live in, free from any discussion of sexual violence because of course it's wrong and everyone knows that but it's not relevant to you, is a myth. The reason you can't see the rapist, despite him answering happily enough in an anonymous poll, is the same reason he is able to continue his activities, because he looks much like everyone else, he looks like you. And if your friend the victim, whose only mistake was to find herself in the same room as a rapist, failed to place her trust in you, the system, and twelve jurors, one of whom thinks it was her fault anyway, can you really blame her?
This needs to be talked about, it needs to be discussed, rape apologism and trivialisation need to be confronted because we, as a society, are letting down half of our members. The primarily male audience on teamliquid has the luxury of it not being a problem which is likely to impact them personally (although the despicable tacit consent of prison rape may), instead it'll impact our daughters.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 14:12 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:04 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 13:16 sunprince wrote:On August 24 2012 23:33 KwarK wrote:
Regarding Sunprince's argument that rape culture is a myth and that men today aren't raised with a massive sense of entitlement.
I have actually gotten a series of PM from IceThorn who was originally banned for comparing raping a woman who the man thinks is teasing him with someone that teases a guy starving to death of food and gets it stolen.
[quote]
[quote]
He explains that I misunderstood his point and he was trying to say that nobody ever would blame a man for ignoring a no if he was turned on because he thought he was getting sex. That obviously you can't just go out and rape someone but if you're really turned on and she made you turned on then you're entitled to her body and that's her fault and you, as the man, get to judge this. That being a man is like starving to death and denying a man sex is akin to teasing someone dying of starvation with food. These people legitimately exist and they don't even get that there's something off about their views. Male entitlement is a real thing. I don't think anyone disagrees that male entitlement is a real thing, nor do we disagree that victim blaming happens. The issue is that feminists and their white knight supporters think that these and similar things happen all the time, but the statistical data, simple logical reasoning, and any familiarity at all with modern culture explains why this is not the case. We have murderers out there too, yet no one takes the idea that we have some sort of "murder culture" seriously, and for good reason. The "nobody says there is a murder culture" argument misses the point. It's not that rape happens, like murder. It's that a lot of members of society will still happily turn around and say "boys will be boys", an apologistic assumption that rape is simply a natural result of gender relations and that women are overreacting, in response to it. This is an assumption, one that is not verified by any evidence. Show me evidence that a majority of society are rape apologists, and then you have a legitimate argument. In order for a culture to exist, this would have to be prevalent, but anyone familiar with first-world culture would tell you that most people consider rape the most heinous of crimes. On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:
It doesn't sum up rape culture but it's a good example of the mentality behind it in my opinion. I can think of no comparable expression regarding murder, murder apologism and downplaying the impact of murder have never been pervasive in the same way. If you buy into loaded feminists statistics regarding rape, then of course legitimate statistics from criminological sources will appear to be downplaying murder. As for apologism, you can see a similar amount of murder "victim blaming" every time a murder happens and people give tips for how to avoid being murdered. A majority is not required for my definition of rape culture. Demanding I provide evidence of a majority in order to validate my belief is a red herring. Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge!
Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then".
Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication.
|
On August 25 2012 16:23 KwarK wrote:You want unambiguous questions, try the following. + Show Spoiler +
(1) Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate?
(2) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)?
(3) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
(4) Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
Lisak & Miller at 77-78.]
Those may not cover every scenario but they're all fairly clear examples of rape or attempted rape and nobody, when posed with those questions, could doubt what was being asked of them. Right? An ethnically diverse group of 1882 college students, ranging in age from 18 to 71 with a median age of 26.5 was asked those questions. 120 said yes they had. Are those clear enough for you? Source http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/
That's really pretty shocking. Not so much the 6%ish figure (rape is one of the most common crimes, after all), but the fact that this is self-reporting. For clarification, I can't see whether this was put to both sexes or only one. Does it say anywhere?
Regardless, I'm not sure what that has to do with general belief regarding responsibility, however, or why you think it legitimises the questionnaire you posted. I would argue that almost everyone has committed some (non-sexual) assault at some time or other, but that doesn't mean we find it acceptable as a society. That it's prevalent is worrying, but it doesn't suggest that we have a culture that supports it. Well, at least it doesn't to me - perhaps you do think we have a "violence culture", which is a point of view I could understand.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 16:34 FuzzyJAM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:23 KwarK wrote:You want unambiguous questions, try the following. + Show Spoiler +
(1) Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate?
(2) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)?
(3) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
(4) Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
Lisak & Miller at 77-78.]
Those may not cover every scenario but they're all fairly clear examples of rape or attempted rape and nobody, when posed with those questions, could doubt what was being asked of them. Right? An ethnically diverse group of 1882 college students, ranging in age from 18 to 71 with a median age of 26.5 was asked those questions. 120 said yes they had. Are those clear enough for you? Source http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/ That's really pretty shocking. Not so much the 6%ish figure (rape is one of the most common crimes, after all), but the fact that this is self-reporting. For clarification, I can't see whether this was put to both sexes or only one. Does it say anywhere? Regardless, I'm not sure what that has to do with general belief regarding responsibility, however, or why you think it legitimises the questionnaire you posted. I would argue that almost everyone has committed some (non-sexual) assault at some time or other, but that doesn't mean we find it acceptable as a society. That it's prevalent is worrying, but it doesn't suggest that we have a culture that supports it. Well, at least it doesn't to me - perhaps you do think we have a "violence culture", which is a point of view I could understand.
The questions were just put to men. The full study is here.
http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/cache/documents/1348/134851.pdf
|
On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 14:12 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:04 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 13:16 sunprince wrote:
[quote]
I don't think anyone disagrees that male entitlement is a real thing, nor do we disagree that victim blaming happens. The issue is that feminists and their white knight supporters think that these and similar things happen all the time, but the statistical data, simple logical reasoning, and any familiarity at all with modern culture explains why this is not the case.
We have murderers out there too, yet no one takes the idea that we have some sort of "murder culture" seriously, and for good reason. The "nobody says there is a murder culture" argument misses the point. It's not that rape happens, like murder. It's that a lot of members of society will still happily turn around and say "boys will be boys", an apologistic assumption that rape is simply a natural result of gender relations and that women are overreacting, in response to it. This is an assumption, one that is not verified by any evidence. Show me evidence that a majority of society are rape apologists, and then you have a legitimate argument. In order for a culture to exist, this would have to be prevalent, but anyone familiar with first-world culture would tell you that most people consider rape the most heinous of crimes. On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:
It doesn't sum up rape culture but it's a good example of the mentality behind it in my opinion. I can think of no comparable expression regarding murder, murder apologism and downplaying the impact of murder have never been pervasive in the same way. If you buy into loaded feminists statistics regarding rape, then of course legitimate statistics from criminological sources will appear to be downplaying murder. As for apologism, you can see a similar amount of murder "victim blaming" every time a murder happens and people give tips for how to avoid being murdered. A majority is not required for my definition of rape culture. Demanding I provide evidence of a majority in order to validate my belief is a red herring. Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication.
I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped."
You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 14:12 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:04 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
The "nobody says there is a murder culture" argument misses the point. It's not that rape happens, like murder. It's that a lot of members of society will still happily turn around and say "boys will be boys", an apologistic assumption that rape is simply a natural result of gender relations and that women are overreacting, in response to it. This is an assumption, one that is not verified by any evidence. Show me evidence that a majority of society are rape apologists, and then you have a legitimate argument. In order for a culture to exist, this would have to be prevalent, but anyone familiar with first-world culture would tell you that most people consider rape the most heinous of crimes. On August 25 2012 13:58 KwarK wrote:
It doesn't sum up rape culture but it's a good example of the mentality behind it in my opinion. I can think of no comparable expression regarding murder, murder apologism and downplaying the impact of murder have never been pervasive in the same way. If you buy into loaded feminists statistics regarding rape, then of course legitimate statistics from criminological sources will appear to be downplaying murder. As for apologism, you can see a similar amount of murder "victim blaming" every time a murder happens and people give tips for how to avoid being murdered. A majority is not required for my definition of rape culture. Demanding I provide evidence of a majority in order to validate my belief is a red herring. Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered.
So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law?
|
On August 25 2012 16:41 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:34 FuzzyJAM wrote:On August 25 2012 16:23 KwarK wrote:You want unambiguous questions, try the following. + Show Spoiler +
(1) Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate?
(2) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)?
(3) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
(4) Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
Lisak & Miller at 77-78.]
Those may not cover every scenario but they're all fairly clear examples of rape or attempted rape and nobody, when posed with those questions, could doubt what was being asked of them. Right? An ethnically diverse group of 1882 college students, ranging in age from 18 to 71 with a median age of 26.5 was asked those questions. 120 said yes they had. Are those clear enough for you? Source http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/ That's really pretty shocking. Not so much the 6%ish figure (rape is one of the most common crimes, after all), but the fact that this is self-reporting. For clarification, I can't see whether this was put to both sexes or only one. Does it say anywhere? Regardless, I'm not sure what that has to do with general belief regarding responsibility, however, or why you think it legitimises the questionnaire you posted. I would argue that almost everyone has committed some (non-sexual) assault at some time or other, but that doesn't mean we find it acceptable as a society. That it's prevalent is worrying, but it doesn't suggest that we have a culture that supports it. Well, at least it doesn't to me - perhaps you do think we have a "violence culture", which is a point of view I could understand. The questions were just put to men. The full study is here. http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/cache/documents/1348/134851.pdf
Interesting. I guess I can understand only asking males, though it's worth noting that this probably means that prevalence or rapists is far lower than you're suggesting - because we don't have the data, we don't know how much lower it would go if both sexes were asked, but it's reasonable to assume that women use violence for sex far less, and while a straight "Let's halve the number!" wouldn't be fair, I suspect it's far closer to 1/33 than the 1/16 you (appear to be) suggesting.
Regarding the rest of my post, do you have a response? Or do you not think it's worthwhile? Is the huge amount of assault committed by almost everyone evidence that we have a "violence culture"?
For the record, I absolutely think rape is treated differently from most crimes by society, and that there needs to be more done to expose this. However, I also believe that it can be presented almost as wrongly by those I agree with as those I disagree with, and that in wrongly presenting the correct view people harm it immensely. Which reminds me of the "Well at least you've found a way to feel superior to both" comic that gets posted so much, so maybe it's just my arrogance, but regardless. . .that's how I feel.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 16:52 FuzzyJAM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:41 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:34 FuzzyJAM wrote:On August 25 2012 16:23 KwarK wrote:You want unambiguous questions, try the following. + Show Spoiler +
(1) Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate?
(2) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)?
(3) Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
(4) Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate?
Lisak & Miller at 77-78.]
Those may not cover every scenario but they're all fairly clear examples of rape or attempted rape and nobody, when posed with those questions, could doubt what was being asked of them. Right? An ethnically diverse group of 1882 college students, ranging in age from 18 to 71 with a median age of 26.5 was asked those questions. 120 said yes they had. Are those clear enough for you? Source http://yesmeansyesblog.wordpress.com/2009/11/12/meet-the-predators/ That's really pretty shocking. Not so much the 6%ish figure (rape is one of the most common crimes, after all), but the fact that this is self-reporting. For clarification, I can't see whether this was put to both sexes or only one. Does it say anywhere? Regardless, I'm not sure what that has to do with general belief regarding responsibility, however, or why you think it legitimises the questionnaire you posted. I would argue that almost everyone has committed some (non-sexual) assault at some time or other, but that doesn't mean we find it acceptable as a society. That it's prevalent is worrying, but it doesn't suggest that we have a culture that supports it. Well, at least it doesn't to me - perhaps you do think we have a "violence culture", which is a point of view I could understand. The questions were just put to men. The full study is here. http://www.innovations.harvard.edu/cache/documents/1348/134851.pdf Interesting. I guess I can understand only asking males, though it's worth noting that this probably means that prevalence or rapists is far lower than you're suggesting - because we don't have the data, we don't know how much lower it would go if both sexes were asked, but it's reasonable to assume that women use violence for sex far less, and while a straight "Let's halve the number!" wouldn't be fair, I suspect it's far closer to 1/33 than the 1/16 you (appear to be) suggesting. Regarding the rest of my post, do you have a response? Or do you not think it's worthwhile? Is the huge amount of assault committed by almost everyone evidence that we have a "violence culture"? For the record, I absolutely think rape is treated differently from most crimes by society, and that there needs to be more done to expose this. However, I also believe that it can be presented almost as wrongly by those I agree with as those I disagree with, and that in wrongly presenting the correct view people harm it immensely. Which reminds me of the "Well at least you've found a way to feel superior to both" comic that gets posted so much, so maybe it's just my arrogance, but regardless. . .that's how I feel.
The 1/16 was from the Amnesty International survey which applied to both genders, not the Lisak study which dealt just with men.
I feel the media and popular attitudes towards violence to encourage the idea that casual violence is to be expected and shouldn't be taken especially seriously. I do not, however, believe it has been institutionalised in the same way that sexual violence was, the legacy of sexual violence stems from a culture emerging from what was previously a strict patriarchy. Men have historically been over-represented as victims of violence as well as perpetrators which prevents an ingrained cultural acceptance that it's okay. We're still getting used to the idea that women are allowed to have sex for recreation and that marriage does not legally oblige a wife to provide her husband with sex while we've always known that beating someone senseless because you feel entitled to is wrong, it's not a comparable situation.
|
On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 14:12 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:04 sunprince wrote:
[quote]
This is an assumption, one that is not verified by any evidence. Show me evidence that a majority of society are rape apologists, and then you have a legitimate argument. In order for a culture to exist, this would have to be prevalent, but anyone familiar with first-world culture would tell you that most people consider rape the most heinous of crimes.
[quote]
If you buy into loaded feminists statistics regarding rape, then of course legitimate statistics from criminological sources will appear to be downplaying murder. As for apologism, you can see a similar amount of murder "victim blaming" every time a murder happens and people give tips for how to avoid being murdered. A majority is not required for my definition of rape culture. Demanding I provide evidence of a majority in order to validate my belief is a red herring. Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law?
First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%.
And second of all, since you asked, I would personally like to see some more numbers before I jump to conclusions. What kind of numbers do we see, for instance, in cases of rape where the victim is a male? What kind of numbers do we see for other crimes? I mean what percentage of the population blames murder victims (I think the recent Trayvon Martin case would lead me to believe a regrettable amount) rather than murderers? Is this 8% in any way exceptional? Is it higher than the average rate of victim blaming or lower? These are the sorts of questions I would like to have at least preliminary data on. All that study was intended to do was gauge public opinion on rape and victim-responsibility, and it found that we by and large do not fall into the trap of victim-blaming. I don't really see it as grounds for some rennovation of criminal law. But like I said, I would be open to additional research, additional context, that sort of thing.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:On August 25 2012 14:12 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
A majority is not required for my definition of rape culture. Demanding I provide evidence of a majority in order to validate my belief is a red herring. Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%.
In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist.
Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that in some cases which are legally rape women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here?
|
On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:[quote] Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here?
No, I don't.
In fact, I think it's sort of assumed that there will be serious differences of opinion about guilt when it comes to different jury members. I think the number of instances in which all twelve jury members agree before going into deliberation has got to be vanishingly small, and nevertheless juries seem to function. But then again I'm no legal expert, and, like I said, I would love to have some more information on how jurors with terrible opinions hinder or do not hinder justice in the prosecution of various crimes including rape.
(A smaller quibbling point is that only 6% of the population believe a flirtatious woman is entirely to blame. So, in that particular case, we don't reach your 1/12 critical mass.)
EDIT: bed calls, but you carry on and I'll catch up tomorrow.
|
On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:40 sunprince wrote:[quote] Feminists define rape culture as a culture in which prevalent attitudes, norms, practices, and media, normalize/excuse/tolerate/condone sexual violence. If you cannot show that such atttitudes are a majority, then you would at least have to show that they are a substantial minority; otherwise, the notion of prevalence is not supported. Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc. In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that in some cases which are legally rape women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here?
Again, huge ambiguity of the questions.
You interpret them one way, I interpreted them another entirely. I see no reason to assume you represent the majority interpretation, and therefore I see no reason to assume the data says what you think it does. Can you give any?
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 17:33 HULKAMANIA wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc.
In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here? No, I don't. In fact, I think it's sort of assumed that there will be serious differences of opinion about guilt when it comes to different jury members. I think the number of instances in which all twelve jury members agree before going into deliberation has got to be vanishingly small, and nevertheless juries seem to function. But then again I'm no legal expert, and, like I said, I would love to have some more information on how jurors with terrible opinions hinder or do not hinder justice in the prosecution of various crimes including rape. (A smaller quibbling point is that only 6% of the population believe a flirtatious woman is entirely to blame. So, in that particular case, we don't reach your 1/12 critical mass.)
My apologies. The chance of drawing at least one juror who believes a flirtatious woman is entirely to blame for her own rape is only 52.5%, based upon that 6%. So there is a better than even chance she'll be judged entirely to blame (and by definition the defendant not at all to blame) by at least one of the twelve people she requires to unanimously enforce the law. Clearly the system protects women who have flirted.
We're not talking about disagreement about his whether or not the rapist did it being resolved by jury deliberation. We're talking about a portion of the population which, at 6%, will be on represented in 52.5% of juries and at 8% will be on 72% of juries who literally do not recognise the crime. 8% of people think that a woman who has had many sexual partners in the past is exclusively to blame for her rape. In 72% of juries there will be at least one person who could listen to the rapist say "yes, I held a knife to her throat and told her I'd kill her if she didn't" and would still think the only guilty person in the room is the victim. Not that both did something wrong (believed by 14% of people), that the only guilty party is the victim. When the law defines an act as one thing and the people who it uses to enforce the law believe it is another then the system is fundamentally broken.
|
United States41979 Posts
On August 25 2012 17:36 FuzzyJAM wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:On August 25 2012 14:48 KwarK wrote:
[quote]
Words define prevalent as widespread or powerful. I'm sure you'll agree that there are powerful individuals with idiotic views regarding rape, as for widespread, you'll get people signing on with victim blaming from all walks of life etc.
In your attempt to force a strict adherence to the definition you've argued that it exists. No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that in some cases which are legally rape women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here? Again, huge ambiguity of the questions. You interpret them one way, I interpreted them another entirely. I see no reason to assume you represent the majority interpretation, and therefore I see no reason to assume the data says what you think it does. Can you give any?
You indicated one question previously which you thought was ambiguous although it didn't seem especially ambiguous to me. You now appear to be dismissing all of it, care to clarify upon what grounds you do so?
|
On August 25 2012 17:45 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:33 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:
[quote]
No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here? No, I don't. In fact, I think it's sort of assumed that there will be serious differences of opinion about guilt when it comes to different jury members. I think the number of instances in which all twelve jury members agree before going into deliberation has got to be vanishingly small, and nevertheless juries seem to function. But then again I'm no legal expert, and, like I said, I would love to have some more information on how jurors with terrible opinions hinder or do not hinder justice in the prosecution of various crimes including rape. (A smaller quibbling point is that only 6% of the population believe a flirtatious woman is entirely to blame. So, in that particular case, we don't reach your 1/12 critical mass.) My apologies. The chance of drawing at least one juror who believes a flirtatious woman is entirely to blame for her own rape is only 52.5%, based upon that 6%. So there is a better than even chance she'll be judged entirely to blame (and by definition the defendant not at all to blame) by at least one of the twelve people she requires to unanimously enforce the law. Clearly the system protects women who have flirted. We're not talking about disagreement about his whether or not the rapist did it being resolved by jury deliberation. We're talking about a portion of the population which, at 6%, will be on represented in 52.5% of juries and at 8% will be on 72% of juries who literally do not recognise the crime. 8% of people think that a woman who has had many sexual partners in the past is exclusively to blame for her rape. In 72% of juries there will be at least one person who could listen to the rapist say "yes, I held a knife to her throat and told her I'd kill her if she didn't" and would still think the only guilty person in the room is the victim. Not that both did something wrong (believed by 14% of people), that the only guilty party is the victim. When the law defines an act as one thing and the people who it uses to enforce the law believe it is another then the system is fundamentally broken.
You're assuming these people get past jury selection and that after having done so, they will not listen to a judge's explicit instructions nor will their opinion change when they have a clear reason to think deeply on the issue.
Juries do not come out of thin air, they are vetted for this reason for all cases.
On August 25 2012 17:47 KwarK wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 17:36 FuzzyJAM wrote:On August 25 2012 17:19 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 17:12 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:50 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:46 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 16:33 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 16:26 HULKAMANIA wrote:On August 25 2012 15:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 14:52 Wombat_NI wrote:
[quote]
No he hasn't really. People hold that view, some of them influential, but not a large amount proportionally, and the influential individuals may not use their influence to try to influence the views of others. You could clear that anti-semitism is a big part of our culture, or overt racism or any number of unsavory things. That something exists and has adherents is beyond dispute in those instances, but to claim they are culturally influential is overstating their impact. ICM interviewed a random sample of 1,095 adults aged 18+ by telephone.
They were given a series of scenarios and asked to indicate whether they believed a woman was totally responsible, partially responsible or not at all responsible for being raped.
If the woman was drunk, 4pc said she was totally responsible and 26pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman behaved in a flirtatious manner, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 28pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman failed to say "no" clearly to the man, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 29pc said she was partially responsible.
If the woman was wearing sexy or revealing clothing, 6pc said she was totally responsible and 20pc said she was partially responsible.
If it is known that the woman has many sexual partners, 8pc said she was totally responsible and 14pc said she was partially responsible.
If she is alone and walking in a dangerous or deserted area, 5pc said she was totally responsible and 17pc said she was partially responsible. Sourced from http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-369262/Women-blame-raped.htmlThere's a fairly solid 1/4 of respondents who think women are to blame for their rapes and 1/20 will consistently argue that the victim is entirely to blame for their rape if she flirts. 1/16 think the blame is entirely on a woman for being raped if she has been promiscuous. There's a sickness within society. You still haven't proved that these attitudes are culturally influential or persuasive, or that such blame games are peculiar to rape cases with a female victim (which is, of course, the only gender included in the poll). The crazy part is that even the study you cited (Well, you cited a dailymail news blurb on the study) concludes that, "overall these results suggest that people generally feel a woman’s behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." It's a study funded by Amnesty International as part of their "Stop Violence Against Women" campaign, and it still concluded that for the most part, no, people do not blame women for being rape victims. Of course certain "sections of the population," according to the report, fall into this lamentable habit. The two social groups they point out as especially likely are the elderly and the socially disadvantaged, two demographics fabled for their bottomless propensity for warm fellow-feelings. So anyway, according to your study, that's where the battles against rape culture must be waged, in nursing homes and foodstamp lines. Mount up and charge! Yeah, it concluded that 3/4 of people think that the rapist is to blame, only 1/4 of people blame the victim. That's not good enough and I'm amazed you have the audacity to look at the numbers, then look at the conclusion and say "that's fine then". Also unless you have any problem with the questions or the methodology of the survey I have no idea why you think the funding is relevant. Of course a group concerned with violence against women commissioned a survey on views regarding violence against women. You have not raised any issues with their methodology, only a vague implication. I was quoting your study, so you don't have to be amazed at my audacity. Be amazed at the audacity of folks at the ICM who reported to Amnesty International that "people generally feel that a woman's behaviour does not make them responsible for being raped." You're trying to use this study as evidence that rape culture exists and that it is ascendant in society. The professionals who conducted it seem to have a far more mundane assessment of the data that they gathered. So what is your personal opinion? Do you think it is a problem that we simultaneously have a legal system which requires members of the public to confirm the guilt of the accused while a proportion of the public significant enough to be represented on every jury panel blames the crime entirely on the victim? Do you think that's a system that will successfully enforce the law? First of all let's keep things in perspective. The highest "total blame" came in at 8% for when the woman failed to clearly say no. So even there, there's the 92% of the population that doesn't think it's entirely her fault and the 63% who think she's not to blame at all. These people will also be represented on juries, and, as probability would lead us to believe, they will be represented as a overwhelming majority. Which is kind of the point of the jury system, I think. It allows communal decision making to overrule or correct the personal biases we display as individuals. So, yeah, first of all I don't think Justice is swaying on her marble pedestal because of the opinions of this terrible 8%. In the United Kingdom to find the defendant guilty you need unanimous juror condemnation or a 10-2 majority in special cases. So this 8% who believe that the defendant is not to blame for the rape, even if they accept that it happened, in cases where the rape victim flirted with her rapist. Let's run the numbers again. 8%, (roughly 1/12 people) think that the woman can be entirely to blame for a rape. A rape trial needs 12 people to agree that the rapist raped the victim in order to convict. 1/12 people believe that in some cases which are legally rape women are solely to blame for their rape. You see no problem here? Again, huge ambiguity of the questions. You interpret them one way, I interpreted them another entirely. I see no reason to assume you represent the majority interpretation, and therefore I see no reason to assume the data says what you think it does. Can you give any? You indicated one question previously which you thought was ambiguous although it didn't seem especially ambiguous to me. You now appear to be dismissing all of it, care to clarify upon what grounds you do so?
I'm not dismissing all of the questions, you brought up the question I already dismissed.
You can claim it's "unambiguous" but clearly that's not the case if two different people can have different ideas entirely about what it means. Maybe you think I'm just stupid, I don't know, but even if that's so, lots of people are stupid, so that doesn't change the fact that the question is seemingly unlikely to give an accurate representation of anything.
|
It's also worth noting that you think a victim being said to be "entirely to blame" for something excludes the possibility of a conviction. I don't see why that's the case. It's very easy to imagine a worldview where a perpetrator can be convicted despite someone considering the victim "entirely to blame". Indeed, I recall a case where a judge (sorry, don't remember the name, this was four years ago) stated that the criminal could not be convicted of one charge, intended to protect victims who made reasonable provisions (the victim was seen as entirely to blame), but that the criminal could be convicted of crimes which had no such requirements of the victim not being to blame. Rape, to my knowledge, has no requirements for the victim acting "sensibly" in any legal jurisdiction, and therefore a precedent we can take is that the victim can be to blame and yet a rape can still have been committed that requires punishment, at least according to certain Scottish judges.
You can view such ideas as warped or false, but it's still a view people hold - the victim can be entirely at fault, yet they believe the criminal still should be punished. Ergo, some people (I don't know of the prevalence) can say the victim is entirely to blame, and yet a conviction should still happen.
This just further shows ambiguity in the questions, beyond even the specific difficulty I pointed out with one - how many people believe one person can be "entirely to blame" and yet others can also be to blame to some extent as well? How many believe that just because a victim is to blame, the person who committed a crime cannot be punished? I genuinely have no idea. Regardless, it's yet another reason why the jump from "X% of people say the victim is entirely to blame for certain crimes occurring" to "This means that juries likely have one person who will exonerate those who, on the facts, they agree to have legally committed rape" simply does not work.
|
The people who think the victim is entirely to blame, are differentiated from people who think some blame rests on the victim, and some on the rapist. This suggests that those people do believe that no blame rests on the rapist.This fact, coupled with the fact that a woman's promiscuity, dress style, and flirty character are admissable in court, make it seem like rape apologetics may be a real thing in courts.
That said, most people will conform if they are faced with overwhelming opposition to their opinion, I don't think many, if any, rapists go free because jurors think rape victims are always to blame. My own country uses no jury or layjudges at all, and I feel quite confident judges do not let victim blaming play a role in the proceedings.
I think the discussion has focused too much on the courtroom implications of victim blaming, rather than the much more pressing issues these kind of attitudes pose to society. Namely that such attitudes cause more women to be raped, and the fact that raped women are further victimized, after the fact, by those that view them as dumb sluts who should not have flirted so much.
|
Northern Ireland23799 Posts
On August 25 2012 18:44 Crushinator wrote:
The people who think the victim is entirely to blame, are differentiated from people who think some blame rests on the victim, and some on the rapist. This suggests that those people do believe that no blame rests on the rapist.This fact, coupled with the fact that a woman's promiscuity, dress style, and flirty character are admissable in court, make it seem like rape apologetics may be a real thing in courts.
That said, most people will conform if they are faced with overwhelming opposition to their opinion, I don't think many, if any, rapists go free because jurors think rape victims are always to blame. My own country uses no jury or layjudges at all, and I feel quite confident judges do not let victim blaming play a role in the proceedings.
I think the discussion has focused too much on the courtroom implications of victim blaming, rather than the much more pressing issues these kind of attitudes pose to society. Namely that such attitudes cause more women to be raped, and the fact that raped women are further victimized, after the fact, by those that view them as dumb sluts who should not have flirted so much.
I don't think that people are necessarily assigning blame onto the victim, in lieu of doing so to the perpetrator at least from one of those polls that Kwark linked last page. Unless it was worded specifically I'd imagine that some people think, for example that a woman should not get intoxicated and be insuch a situation that rape could occur, but equally they would not necessarily excuse a rapist.
The assignation of blame as such isn't necessarily a zero-sum relationship is what I'm trying to articulate.
|
On August 25 2012 20:27 Wombat_NI wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 18:44 Crushinator wrote:
The people who think the victim is entirely to blame, are differentiated from people who think some blame rests on the victim, and some on the rapist. This suggests that those people do believe that no blame rests on the rapist.This fact, coupled with the fact that a woman's promiscuity, dress style, and flirty character are admissable in court, make it seem like rape apologetics may be a real thing in courts.
That said, most people will conform if they are faced with overwhelming opposition to their opinion, I don't think many, if any, rapists go free because jurors think rape victims are always to blame. My own country uses no jury or layjudges at all, and I feel quite confident judges do not let victim blaming play a role in the proceedings.
I think the discussion has focused too much on the courtroom implications of victim blaming, rather than the much more pressing issues these kind of attitudes pose to society. Namely that such attitudes cause more women to be raped, and the fact that raped women are further victimized, after the fact, by those that view them as dumb sluts who should not have flirted so much. I don't think that people are necessarily assigning blame onto the victim, in lieu of doing so to the perpetrator at least from one of those polls that Kwark linked last page. Unless it was worded specifically I'd imagine that some people think, for example that a woman should not get intoxicated and be insuch a situation that rape could occur, but equally they would not necessarily excuse a rapist. The assignation of blame as such isn't necessarily a zero-sum relationship is what I'm trying to articulate.
What I was trying to say, is that in these polls, there is a category ENTIRELY TO BLAME, which is different from the category TO BLAME. The purpose of making this distinction is to seperate those that do not assign blame to the rapist at all, from the people that assign blame to the victim, bu nevertheless believe that the rapist is at fault.
Now, I am not trying to say that it is impossible that the respondents misinterpreted the intent of the question, but I do think this intent was there.
|
On August 25 2012 05:36 MoltkeWarding wrote:Show nested quote +On August 25 2012 05:18 imallinson wrote:On August 25 2012 05:15 MoltkeWarding wrote:On August 25 2012 04:50 farvacola wrote:On August 25 2012 04:40 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 04:33 TheKefka wrote:On August 25 2012 04:29 KwarK wrote:On August 25 2012 04:26 TheKefka wrote:On August 25 2012 04:22 Crushinator wrote:On August 25 2012 04:14 HULKAMANIA wrote:
[quote]
This post is so bizarre. What kind of system are you talking about that is so unjust and sexist? One that has a defense lawyer? Would you prefer that the defense just take the woman's word for it and leave off speculating entirely? Would that finally be a courtroom free of "residual sexism"?
woman: "I did not do anything unreasonable, and I assure you that I was raped."
judge: "Cool! Case closed then. Let's go to lunch."
The job of the court is to investigate serious accusations like rape thoroughly and evenhandedly. It's not to take the accuser's word for it. That's not misogyny. It's standard courtroom procedure.
What a ridiculous strawman. His point is that it is completely irrelevant if a person is promiscuous, it is completely irrelevant if the dress was sexy. Never, ever does it matter one bit. The only reason anyone would think it does, is because of misogynistic views about how women should act. The view that women in certain clothing are all sluts, and reasonable men could see this slutty behavior as consent to sex with everyone. It is not consent to sex, and reasonable men cannot see this as consent. See,that's the thing.The world does not consist of only reasonable men. The way I see it is like the guy above.If you dress like a hooker,you may not be one,but that shit is fucking confusing to some meat heads lol. To say that clothing has no relevance to the type of people you will attract as a female is laughable. If these meatheads are so easily confused that they might, in their confusion, have sex with someone who has explicitly denied them consent to sex then they need to be behind bars for the protection of society because they are rapists. What's your point to lock people up before they do something lol? I'm just stating that I agree with the guy who's point is that the world has it's dark side and,while you can't always be safe against something,there are certainly way's to not get into a situation where you will get hurt. You're buying into the stranger in a dark alley rape myth. You're way more likely to be raped by an acquaintance, partner, ex-partner or even family member. You generally get no indication that the person is a rapist because they look and act much like everyone else up until the rape. If you buy into the "don't give anyone the opportunity" bullshit then, once you understand the facts of rape, you must strip women of all liberties or blame them for rape when they enjoy the same freedoms that men do. The idea that you can simply avoid rapists when 6% of college aged men will, when asked anonymously, admit to being rapists, is absurd. Source for that 6% claim http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist/2009/11/12/rapists-who-dont-think-theyre-rapists/ Can you substantiate this claim a bit more? I only ask because in my experience potential rapists tend to hold certain beliefs in regards to women and their status as human beings. Having gone through an undergraduate college education at a major state school, I came into contact with a few men who ended up being convicted of rape, and all of them maintained a particular brand of female objectification very much in line with the ideology of PUA and movements such as that. What I am getting at is that perhaps there is work to be done in terms of our societal ideation of what constitutes an inappropriate consideration of females. I simply do not buy that a potential rapist is undetectable. I, for the life of me, have never understood what "objectification" means, either philosophically or phenomenologically. I do think that you are on the brink of going over an uncomfortable boundary, which would nonetheless be worthy to explore: to what extent is rape an escalation of Eros, when it is liberated from the taming influences of Agape in a post-Christian society? In this context it is men seeing women as things that exist only for their own sexual gratification. Why must it be men seeing women as things that exist only for their own sexual gratification is the sole definition of objectification? What if man sees a woman as a thing that exists only to be the mother of his children? Or a woman as a thing that exists only to be the companion of his life? Or a woman as a thing that exists only to be the co-participant of his inner soul? I am certain you would agree that those are equally acts of objectification, unless you mean by object only the carnal part of a woman. In which case, society and science have amicably produced the answer in the form of ever-improving paraphernalia. Now, granting that any opinion of women when given only in relation to himself is "objectification," does it remain so in all circumstances? In other words, do these men think that man is the ultimate cause of women, or do they think that merely in the context of their own relationships with them? If man were the ultimate cause of women, does he have an opinion as to his own ultimate cause? In other words, when he looks cosmologically rather than selfishly, does he think that he himself has some ultimate purpose for his own existence? I am certain you agree that this would constitute self-objectification. So my question is: Resolved, that men commit acts of cognitive "objectification", what does that establish about him ethically?
Or maybe the word in this context has nothing to do with philosophical "objectification".
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT![[image loading]](http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v642/shakespeares_sister/shakes5/cosmocover.png)
