Metro: One Third Believe Flirtatious Women 'Ask' for Rape

[banesmabes 10]

Originally posted by evildrneil

And what about the other 17% ? Are you saying that because they are the minority of case people shouldn't try and minimise the chances that they will be a target?

 

No, we shouldn't ignore it. But we shouldn't just be telling women what not to do. It is men'd behaviour we should be targeting.

 

 

Originally posted by evildrneil

Why don't see this argument about e.g. being carefull where you use your mobile phone (current crime preventions adverts), how you display your MP3 player (current crime prevention billboards) etc. This argument (if it can be called that) looks scarily like 'I should be allowed to do whatever I want and behave however I like without taking any responsibility for the potential outcome'. [/b]

 

Theft is a much more common accurance than stranger rape. Not flashing your mobile about it not an infrigements of civil liberties. Telling women what to wear, how to behave, how to get home at night, etc, is. For instance if I followed the advice I would never be able to go for a night out with friends. I live at completely the opposite ends of town from my friends, so I have to travel home alone. Sometimes it's impossible to get a taxi in town so I have to walk a little way out of the centre to get a taxi. I have no alternative. Apparently I am putting myself at risk of rape by doing this. Maybe I am. But I have common sense, women don't need to be lectured on what is safe and not safe. But when the alternative is not going out at all then it is infringing on my freedoms.

[banesmabes 10]

Originally posted by evildrneil

I'm sorry what conflicts of interest? And what similar biases?? Are you trying to claim there is some sort of conspiracy of researchers???

 

It depends who has engaged them to do the research. We have already discussed how researchers can influence their results with their own biases. And peer reviews are often carried out by people who are sympathetic to the reports initial aims.

 

Originally posted by evildrneil

So you dismiss one report that has been independantly reviewed and published because of 'no other relevent research' - despite the fact that the book you cited earlier have found rates of malicious reporting up to 25% -

in favour of a report that has had no independant critique, no additional supporting evidence (oh and that you have already misrepresented!) and far more open to bias and political misreporting but that fits in with your world view?

 

The same could be said of you citing a report that supports your view of the world. It's a difficult concept for you isn't it, that someone may have a different opinion and that that opinion could be as valid as your own? I'm not sure where I am supposed to have misrepresented the evidence.

[evildrneil 14]

Originally posted by banesmabes

Why would those women who don't report rape (approx 50,000 a year) lie about having being raped? They have nothing to gain from making up allegations.

 

Power? Sympathy?? Mallice??? An alibi for a drunken one night stand????

 

Running with assumption that every allegation of rape is true is just as blind, stupid and damaging as it would be to run with the assumption that they are all false. An allegation is no more or less than an allegation untill it has been proven one way or the other.

[evildrneil 14]

Originally posted by banesmabes

No, we shouldn't ignore it. But we shouldn't just be telling women what not to do. It is men'd behaviour we should be targeting.

 

For possibly the gazilienth time - NO-ONE IS TELLING WOMEN WHAT TO DO! What they are doing is providing suggestions to reduce the risk of becoming a target. Your risks may be low but if you can reduce themis that not a thing that a sane and sensible person would do?

[banesmabes 10]

Originally posted by evildrneil

Power? Sympathy?? Mallice??? An alibi for a drunken one night stand????

 

 

Power: Yes, disclosing that you have been raped and not following that up with the authorities makes you feel really powerful

Sympathy: From whom? Society (as we have seen) is pretty unsympathetic about rape

Mallice: How would telling a researcher that you had been raped be a way of showing mallice to a man who will never know that you have said that?!?

Alibi for a drunken one night stand: Rape used as an alibi?!? maybe society has to face up to the fact that if someone is inebriated then they cannot give consent, so maybe some of these drunken one night stands are rape in the woman's eyes, even if society thinks it's acceptable (as we have seen in one case this week).

 

I'm not saying all of those women who say they have been raped definately have, but there is very little to be achieved in saying that they have been raped.

[banesmabes 10]

Originally posted by evildrneil

For possibly the gazilienth time - NO-ONE IS TELLING WOMEN WHAT TO DO! What they are doing is providing suggestions to reduce the risk of becoming a target. Your risks may be low but if you can reduce themis that not a thing that a sane and sensible person would do?

 

Like I have said, women have common sense and do not need to be lectured on these safety tips. But sometimes they are not practical and sometimes they infringe on your freedoms. And it takes attention away from actually tackling the behaviour that is at fault.

[evildrneil 14]

Originally posted by banesmabes

It depends who has engaged them to do the research. We have already discussed how researchers can influence their results with their own biases. And peer reviews are often carried out by people who are sympathetic to the reports initial aims.

 

Aims? We are talking about academic research here not that carried out by any particular axe to grind.

 

The same could be said of you citing a report that supports your view of the world. It's a difficult concept for you isn't it, that someone may have a different opinion and that that opinion could be as valid as your own? I'm not sure where I am supposed to have misrepresented the evidence.

 

I'm citing reports that counter your 'arguments' - thats part of the debate process. I have no problem with people holding opposing positions but I will argue my point of view and point out where I feel their arguments or premises to be flawed.

 

As to the misrepresentation - you claimed that rape had the same levels of false reporting as any other crime where even the report you cited found eight percent (about four times the level of other crimes) of reports to be false.

[banesmabes 10]

Originally posted by evildrneil

Aims? We are talking about academic research here not that carried out by any particular axe to grind.

 

An academic research has to be funded. And in the US a lot of academic funding comes from organisations who may well have that axe to grind. Not to mention the researcher own personal biases and opinions (academics are not free from these!).

 

 

Originally posted by evildrneil

 

I'm citing reports that counter your 'arguments' - thats part of the debate process. I have no problem with people holding opposing positions but I will argue my point of view and point out where I feel their arguments or premises to be flawed.

 

As to the misrepresentation - you claimed that rape had the same levels of false reporting as any other crime where even the report you cited found eight percent (about four times the level of other crimes) of reports to be false.

 

I apologise for that. I got that figure from the TAR website (anti-rape campaign group), who I believe got the figure from the research mentioned in the quote I placed from the HO report. I did however then research a less biased source and found a more accurate figure of 8%. But this 2% figure shows that research can bring about lower or higher figures depending on the background of the researchers and their financial backers.

[evildrneil 14]

Originally posted by banesmabes

Power: Yes, disclosing that you have been raped and not following that up with the authorities makes you feel really powerful

 

Rape is a pretty universaly reviled offense - making the claim that someone has raped you mobilies this social revuslion against that person - is this not power?

 

Sympathy: From whom? Society (as we have seen) is pretty unsympathetic about rape

 

We have? Where? Who has been unsypathetic about it?

 

Mallice: How would telling a researcher that you had been raped be a way of showing mallice to a man who will never know that you have said that?!?

 

Your making the assumption that he won't know or that you won't tell other people. If you are telling a researcher is it likely that is the only person you will tell?

 

Alibi for a drunken one night stand: Rape used as an alibi?!? maybe society has to face up to the fact that if someone is inebriated then they cannot give consent, so maybe some of these drunken one night stands are rape in the woman's eyes, even if society thinks it's acceptable (as we have seen in one case this week).

 

Firstly - try this scenario - woman A goes to a party and has a drunken one night stand with man B despite having a boyfriend C. Now woman A can either hold up her hands and I say 'I done wrong' as many will or take what may seem an easier way out and cry rape. Not exactly stretching the bounds of possibility is it?

 

Secondly - the legal position (at least as reported in that case) is that drunken consent is still consent.

 

Thirdly - why are you expecting wildly disparate levels of moral behaviour from men and women. Are you suggesting that in the case of the typical drunken night out if a couple end up in bed/against a wall whatever and the woman consents to sex that the man should always be in a sober and sensible enough state to think to himself "this woman may be too drunk to say yes"? Isn't that infringing his freedoms far more than the suggestion that to reduce thier potential taget profile a woman should avoid walking down a dark back alley while drunk and wearing skimpy clothing? Perhaps the woman should take the responsibility to not get into the state where she may give drunken consent?

 

I'm not saying all of those women who say they have been raped definately have, but there is very little to be achieved in saying that they have been raped.

 

As pointed out above there are multiple possible reasons for makeing such an allegation and the fact remains that these are nothing more than allegations without proof in one direction or the other.

[willman 10]

now that being drunk is no longer an excuse for a quickie that some ladies wished they never had, the claims of rape may subside a little.

 

i do think that all the unfounded allegations(ronaldo), the unsupported allegations(security guard incident) all leave a sour taste in the mouths of a lot of people, men & women.

particularly when the majority of publicised events all seem to revolve around parties,alcohol,private rooms,binge drinking.

they should not be seen as excuses if the offense has been committed, but by not being in that situation in the first place you reduce the risk of being a victim.

 

close friend rape/husband rape i feel is a different issue which should not really be addressed in the same context as the above.

[evildrneil 14]

Originally posted by banesmabes

An academic research has to be funded. And in the US a lot of academic funding comes from organisations who may well have that axe to grind. Not to mention the researcher own personal biases and opinions (academics are not free from these!).

 

As far as I'm aware the US doesn't UK style funding councils but I wuld like to see some evidence that the money comes from pecific organisations rather than scholorships / universities / govenment money.

 

And I agree academics aren't free of personal biases (they are after all human) - hence the peer review process. When a paper is submitted to a journal it will first be sanity checked by the editor of the journal then sent out to a number (typically 3) separate researchers in the field to assess it's originality, methodology etc. Only if a majority of the reviewers agree that the journal is high quality research will it be published. Hence I would put more weight on a peer reviewed, journal published article as being good quality research than a report produced by a single body e.g. the Amnesty report that fired off this thread which I would be suprised if it made it through the sanity check let alone the peer review process!

 

I apologise for that. I got that figure from the TAR website (anti-rape campaign group), who I believe got the figure from the research mentioned in the quote I placed from the HO report. I did however then research a less biased source and found a more accurate figure of 8%. But this 2% figure shows that research can bring about lower or higher figures depending on the background of the researchers and their financial backers.

 

I think that was more a case of biased assessment by TAR rather than biased research in the first place!