Not many many times in my opinion. Delhi sees 158 percent increase in rape cases: Police , this after the infamous gangrape last year. This reported number could be closer to reality as there is awareness among the public now, police also claims tht there are women officers in every police station now and officers are under specific instructions to note down complaints or FIRs immediately as the complainant arrives at the police station.
Perhaps that is what you meant by female empowerment, but Der Trihs’s interpretation is what I’m pointing out as being flawed, victim-blaming thinking.
But I haven’t seen you attacking these studies on the basis of their methodologies. You’ve asserted that they are probably victims of confirmation bias, without bothering to show us how you’ve reached that conclusion. This doesn’t make you too much different than Der Trihs who rejects the science out of hand because it’s “Lies, all lies!”
Oh Lord. You can’t even correctly process information in an abstract. This raises all kinds of red flags for me regarding your ability to critique another person’s research.
Yeah, I know. Which is pretty telling all by itself.
If a woman says no, she really means “yes”. She’s just a dumb broad who doesn’t know her own mind, right? Any worries about unwanted pregnancy, STDs, or emotional entanglements are just her being a big ole silly-nilly.
“If ya’ll would just say ‘yes’ more, men would stop raping ya’ll!” This is what your argument sounds like to my ears. Does it sound as crazy to you as it does to me?
Do you think if homeowners stopped locking their doors, burglars would magically find a new line of work?
Actually, your argument points to the importance of power to rape. “Female empowerment” implies that women are weak and need to be taught what they want. There is no sense in speaking of “male empowerment” because it’s assumed men have all the power they need to get what they want…it’s the women who are broken, not the men. You despise the feminazi argument that rape is an expression of male dominance over women. But your argument is really not that different; it frames women’s sense of agency on men’s terms rather than their own. You are saying that rape is a result of female weakness. If the feminazi argument is despicable, can you tell me why a reasonable person shouldn’t find your argument just as crazy?
You are so indignant that rape isn’t about power. Methinks the lady doth protest too much.
If anyone is interested in actually reading some scholarly studies of rapists and their motivations, I have a list of articles I looked up for a previous thread on the subject. I’ll put them in a spoiler box just so people who aren’t interested don’t have to scroll past a really long post.
[spoiler]Pardue, A., Arrigo, B.A.
Power, anger, and sadistic rapists: Toward a differentiated model of offender personality
(2008) International Journal of Offender Therapy and Comparative Criminology, 52 (4), pp. 378-400
Robertiello, G., Terry, K.J.
Can we profile sex offenders? A review of sex offender typologies
(2007) Aggression and Violent Behavior, 12 (5), pp. 508-518.
Richards, H.J., Washburn, J.J., Craig, R., Taheri, A., Yanisch, D.
Typing rape offenders from their offense narratives
(2004) Individual Differences Research, 2 (2), pp. 97-108.
McCabe, M.P., Wauchope, M.
Behavioral characteristics of men accused of rape: Evidence for different types of rapists
(2003) Archives of Sexual Behavior, 34 (2), pp. 241-253
Canter, D.V., Bennell, C., Alison, L.J., Reddy, S.
Differentiating sex offences: A behaviorally based thematic classification of stranger rapes
(2003) Behavioral Sciences and the Law, 21 (2), pp. 157-174
Hazelwood, R.R., Warren, J.I.
The sexually violent offender: Impulsive or ritualistic?
(2000) Aggression and Violent Behavior, 5 (3), pp. 267-279.
Hunter, J.A., Hazelwood, R.R., Slesinger, D.
Juvenile-perpetrated sex crimes: Patterns of offending and predictors of violence
(2000) Journal of Family Violence, 15 (1), pp. 81-93.
Malamuth, N.M.
The attraction to sexual aggression scale
(1989) The Journal of Sex Research, 26 (1), pp. 26-49
Scully, D., Marolla, J.
Convicted rapists’ vocabulary of motive: Excuses and justifications
(1984) Social Problems, 31 (5), pp. 530-544
Groth, A.N., Burgess, A.W., Holmstrom, L.L.
Rape: Power, anger, and sexuality
(1977) American Journal of Psychiatry, 134 (11), pp. 1239-1243[/spoiler]It’s been several years since I read these and I’m not going to spend my vacation re-reading about a bunch of rape cases, so I’m not in a position to debate about the content of any of these articles. I’m just sharing the list for anyone who’d like to do further reading on the subject but isn’t sure where to begin. The last (and earliest) one on the list, the Groth article, is of particular interest because as far as I can tell this was one of the first studies to conclude that rapists were not primarily motivated by desire for sex. Here’s the abstract:
Because that takes us too far off-topic and it’s something that’s been debated to death on SD.
Of what? There are plenty of examples of less than rigorous topics existing within an otherwise scientific area of study.
Here’s another article that dissects the issue.
It’s telling of your own bias. You single out rape psychologists as being flawed, but you have no evidence for that position at all except your own pre-conceived idea of what their conclusions should be.
Read the paper I just linked to. The author’s conclusions are clear: A rapist’s anticipated ability to achieve sexual dominance is more strongly associated with rape procliviity than a rapist’s anticipated ability to experience sexual arousal. Meaning, it is not as simple as them just being able to get their dick wet, irrespective of consent. The conquest, not the sex, is what is primarily leading them to rape. Even while concluding this, though, they do not exclude the role that sex gratification plays. It’s just not the main motive.
If you have a hard time accepting these conclusions, critique the analysis on scientific grounds. I don’t think you have the chops to do it, but here’s your chance to show evidence for all this confirmation bias you think is hindering rape psychologists from embracing the “truth” as you see it.
Before you do, though, please note that 3 of the 4 authors have male-sounding first names. Not that sexism should cause you to evaluate the paper differently, but for some people inclined to think the field is rife with man-hating feminazis, details like this are important.
I don’t know if you realize this, but every single post you make about how Delhi isn’t really all that bad actually makes it seem even more bad. “Hey guys, did you know that Delhi police are actually required to write down victim complaints now?”
Getting back on topic, it looks like Japan and India don’t really qualify as countries with really low levels of sexual abuse-it’s just under reported in those places. Are there countries with truly low levels of sexual abuse out there?
While trying to answer Czarcasm’s question, I found this interesting article:
Frankly, I must admit that my confidence in psychologists is low. That based on personal past experiences like reading professional reviews where published articles were blatantly non-scientific (mistaking anecdotes for datas, analogies for correlations, that sort of things), seeing them (in a professional setting) still stuck in basic Freudism, seeing them (in social setting) making fun of patients, watching them teaching their personal theory as much based in fact as astrology (probably less so, in fact), learning about them ridiculing themselves in a court of law when explaining how they came to their conclusions, and so on…
Also, it’s not like psychologists have an impeccable record. To give some famous examples, those are the people who used to state that autism was the mother’s fault or that homosexuality was a mental disease.
Yes, I might be prejudiced (in fact, I am prejudiced). There are, no doubt some psychologists I would rely on. But " many psychologists are currently saying that"won’t be sufficient to convince me.
In fact, it seems to me that “rape is about power” is less trendy and more disputed nowadays than it was, say, 15 years ago. All in all, I don’t think we know much about human psychology, and I’m suspicious of people who are too confident in their ability to understand it.
Why not impeach all of science? Physicists used to think the universe could be adequately explained by Newton’s laws (dumbasses!) Chemists used to think you could turn just about anything into gold (idiots!) Evolutionary biologists used to think that if you stretch your neck long enough, the effort would be reflected in your progeny (stupid heads!)
No field has an impeccable record.
I’m still waiting for someone to critique the studies linked above rather than just opinionatin’.
I don’t take issue with skepticism. But those who take take issue with the prevailing theory that rape has more to do with power-seeking behavior than sexual release don’t present as skeptics. They present as people who think they know more than people who study this stuff for a living, despite having no credible basis for such convictions.
Well, that is nice to know, but would it be asking to terribly much of you to supply some kind of substantive critique of any of the literature that has been presented thus far? Because, no offense, I’m not really seeing a whole lot of that from the “psychologists are wrong” side here.
I’ll take this time to remind folks that the SDMB had the rare opportunity to see rape psychology in its full glory a couple years ago. Anyone else remember this thread?
For those who don’t want to comb through that mess, a self-identified “Pick Up Artist” discussed the art of smoothing things over with a woman after thrusting sex upon her against her will. Coincidentally (or not), this poster revealed having many of the same attributes that commonly show up among rapists in research papers. Some of these characteristics include:
-
a history of insecurity which was attributed to falling short of masculine ideals of confidence, strength, boldness, high social standing, sexual promiscuity, and emotional detachment.
-
a fixation with acting the part of the “alpha male”–which requires not only exhibiting the aformentioned traits but also includes constantly putting down “beta males” so that the world can see his superiority to these losers.
-a dismissive, objectifying, contemptuous view towards women; the attitude that “women don’t know what they really want” and are emotional thinkers; the self-serving belief that a woman’s refusal is just her way of testing to see whether he’s man enough to take what he wants; the failure to see women as human beings with unique opinions and thoughts, not just walking genitals who are either hot and sexually relevant, or not hot and thus completely irrelevant.
-a need to be validated as a powerful male by others; it is not enough that they see themselves a certain way; they need to be assured that others do as well. Hence, the constant peacocking and bragging and lecturing.
All of these traits were evident in this guy’s posts. And lo and behold, he professed to engaging in rape behavior, or at least advocating it. If most rapists fit a similar profile (if not more anti-social), how is it reasonable to insist upon reducing rape to just sex?
In as far as any of this is on-topic, can you quote the parts that support your summary? Because I have been involved in PUA threads also, and my recollection is of many people joining such threads with preconceptions of what PUA is about, and the PUAs having to say over and over again that it’s not like that at all.
As for the post where you asked me to read a paper, I have not ignored it. I’m genuinely rather busy right now (I’m moving to China in less than 2 days time…hope SD is not blocked there).
At a cursory look I don’t think there’s anything there that contradicts what I’ve said since I have not claimed that there is a single motive for rape – I’m simply arguing against the position that it is solely about domination. And further, the paper is about a correlation among a subset: those with high “rape myth acceptance”.
But I would need time to read it fully and digest.
Sorry but that requires posting a novel, and I’m not up to doing all that from my Ipad. If you doubt that I’m accurately assessing this poster, you can do a search on his name and read his posts himself. Draw your own conclusions about him.
As for your position in this thread, you have sided with Der’s stance that rape is mostly about sex, and you have opined that researchers who emphasize the role of power as a motive for rape are blinded by confirmation bias or some other agenda. Then you suggested that rape psychology lacks rigor and is fraught with flawed study designs. And yet you have not presented any reasoned-based arguments to support these claims.
Believe it or not, it’s not necessary to hunt for a reason to reject a paper. If you have to rack your brain to figure out the flaws in it, then you should immediately question whether you are open-minded enough to assess it objectively. And would you be just as inclined to rip into a research paper that concluded rape was about horny men wanting sex? Be honest.
Are you being serious or is this sarcasm? I hope it is the latter.
This wouldn’t be the right impression to take. I had written in many posts that the Police are rude and insensitive and judicial process is very slow. During these 4.5 months after the brutal gangrape and protests, the awareness among public is the highest and police claims to have taken corrective measures which is why I said the new reported number of cases would be closer to reality. And btw, during the same period, there’s been 600% rise in molestation cases while 783.67% rise harassment cases.