# jerks. i'm so happy for the women you know. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [February 23, 2003, 8:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008 "2003-02-23T20:11:47Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 19\ **Page:** 9
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2003, 9:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/161 "2003-02-26T21:11:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\*Yes, the nerve of them, the utter futility of rational debate. Just wanted to illustrate the scenario of what you are proposing though: to register, join their board, and then ‘question the orthodoxy.’ If that’s what the first posts are considered in the GD rape thread, that consists of : > > - Just a WAG, but it sounds like BS to me. You also have to consider that not all women who claimed to have been “raped” have actually been “raped”. > > or > > - The definition of “rape” has evolved to the point that just about any sexual episode can be construed as rape by one party on another. > > or > > - I think this particular statistic was made up. No, seriously! > > mind you, you’re in a forum for, by, and about feminists - it probably says so in big green letters over the door - and responses like this are guaranteed to piss off a number of rational people who _don’t_ share that cause. In that case I don’t think the flame-fest would be entirely undeserved. \*\* Well, if the quoted examples are feminists’ idea of statements that are utterly indefensible or self-refuting, and worthy of reponse via flame rather than rational debate, yes, I would say that your chances of maintaining a civil discourse leading to a clearer view of the truth are slim. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\* > Here, well, it’s different…you have a number of nonpolitical opinions, male and female, victim and non-victim alike, saying that it’s possible that those numbers are correct, that it seems to occur frequently. Isn’t it possible to address those opinions instead of Brownmiller’s from 1975? \*\* I don’t know - is it possible? Or will any questioning of the orthodoxy result in flame-fests? Apparently, your view is that it is not, that any questioning of the “1 in 4 women have been raped” is an example of indefensible hatred of women. And I believe that all three of the examples you cited address the question of the OP directly (however insensitively to those Dopers who have been assaulted). The first mentions the allegedly higher rate of false reports of rape (8% vs. 4% for other crimes), the second the (IMO) over-extension of the definition of rape to include situations most do not consider as assaultive (having sex after drinking is not necessarily rape, giving in to a whiney boyfriend is not necessarily rape, etc.) and the third is not so much hateful as consensus among many serious statisticians - the 1 in 4 figure is at best inaccurate and at worst simply imaginary. So if the statistic is bogus - and there seems to be some reason to believe it is - then much of the rest of the thread consisted of anecdotal evidence. People posting that they were assaulted, or that many of their acquaintances had been assaulted, or whatever. Do I need to repeat the general consensus that anecdotal evidence, especially self-selected anecdotal evidence, is not good evidence, and not much use in establishing a 1 in 4 probability at all? I do not wish to minimize the insult that any Dopers feel upon being sexually assaulted. I do not accuse anyone who has shared their own experience of lying. But a statistic is not established as true by the fervor with which its adherents propose it. Rape is a horrible crime. But this does not establish the 1 in 4 statistic as true. Rape is generally a crime committed by men against women. But this does not establish the 1 in 4 statistic as true. Rape has been cruelly minimized and ignored for centuries. But this does not establish the 1 in 4 statistic as true. Plying a woman with alcohol to try to get her into bed is stupid and wrong, but it is qualitatively different from jumping at her from the bushes with a knife. There is a continuum (IMO) along which sex can occur. At one end is violent assault, continuing thru date rape and coercion, into sexual harassment and then verging into situations where women consent to sex when they are not particularly in the mood, and including situations when women use their sexual attractiveness to seduce men in order to achieve their own ends. To lump every sexual encounter that does not occur with a signed legal release form, notarized and witnessed, as “rape” is to abuse the language. IMO. And I do not want to minimize the suffering of those who have been raped. But the fact that it happened to some does not mean that it always happened that way. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Zoff](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/z/6de8d8/32.png) [@Zoff](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Zoff)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2003, 9:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/162 "2003-02-26T21:47:19Z")
> [@](#): > > _Originally posted by cowgirl_ > I feel like in America, it is necessary to justify your experience in order to get charges laid (‘But your Honour, he really did rape me, because he put his …’ etc) but in Canada you need say ‘He touched me sexually without my consent’ and that’s all that’s necessary for the crime to be recognized. Just to provide a little information regarding sexual assault vs. rape vs. sodomy. Most (if not all) US states have varying degrees of sexual assault that do not require penetration. Many have definitions quite similar to the Canadian code section you cited. Rape, however, can require penis/vagina contact or penetration. Many states distinguish between rape and forcible sodomy so in some states it’s true that a man cannot rape another man. He would be guilty of forcible sodomy, not rape. I just wanted to throw that in because the thread is interesting but is going off on some tangents due to confusion about definitions. ---
**Author:** ![Nightime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Nightime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nightime)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2003, 10:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/163 "2003-02-26T22:13:07Z")
Shodan: > [@](#): > > There is a continuum (IMO) along which sex can occur. At one end is violent assault, continuing thru date rape and coercion, into sexual harassment and then verging into situations where women consent to sex when they are not particularly in the mood, and including situations when women use their sexual attractiveness to seduce men in order to achieve their own ends. I disagree that violent rape is necessarily the worst. Acquaintance rape can be just as bad. Just because the victim does not fight back does not mean it is any better. In many cases they may be weak, drugged, surprised, feeling helpless, etc. If they say “no” then that is it. They don’t have to say no and try to fight off the attacker. Going on a date with someone does not mean that you are giving consent to having sex with them. If the attacker continues without consent, then it is rape, just as much as if they had a knife. Truth Seeker: > [@](#): > > Males are neither genetically nor socially wired to view being “raped” by a women the same way as women view rape. If a man gets drunk at a party and a women drags him home and forces herself on him, he would be far more likely to brag about the encounter than to feel violated and guilty. _Please_ speak for yourself. Malacandra: > [@](#): > > This isn’t exactly a fear issue for me, so much as outrage at the deliberate slander being perpetrated against my sex, and at the political motivations of those doing so. I was talking in more general terms about why males do not want to believe that rape occurs with great frequency. You could also replace the word “fear” with “outrage” or “sadness.” Men may be fearful/outraged/depressed that they could be falsely accused, that they could be raped themselves in jail, that they are part of a gender that might be seen as inherently bad, or that their loved ones may have been or could be raped. Of course this isn’t a comprehensive list. Because of this, it is understandable that men would feel attacked by such a statistic, especially one that is seemingly poorly supported and defined. It doesn’t make them evil. And by minimizing their feelings and saying they should not feel attacked by this statistic, or calling them jerks for feeling that way, no reasonable discussion will occur. However, it is also important that certain males keep in mind these reasons they have to not want to believe that rape occurs often. It is far too easy to rationalize, to say that if the woman does not fight back it is not real rape, to say that date rape is not as bad, to exaggerate the number of women who file false charges of rape, to say stranger rape is the only real rape. Rape does occur, and even if the woman is scared and only weakly says “no” with no fighting back to her date, it is rape of the worst kind. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 26, 2003, 11:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/164 "2003-02-26T23:16:38Z")
Good heavens, **Nighttime** , I am certainly not denying that date rape is rape. And I don’t feel strongly enough about my continuum of sexual violence to try to argue which is worse, rape by a stranger or rape by an acquaintance. > [@](#): > > If they say “no” then that is it. They don’t have to say no and try to fight off the attacker. Going on a date with someone does not mean that you are giving consent to having sex with them. If the attacker continues without consent, then it is rape, just as much as if they had a knife. All of which is unquestionably true. What I was trying to get at with my continuum is not what kind of rape is worst, an unproductive question at best and insulting to women at worst, but the varying degree in which there is ambiguity about whether the sex might have been consensual or not. Without implying that all claims of date rape are bogus, it is more possible that a date would end in consensual sex than that a women would agree to have uncoerced sex with a stranger who jumped her from the bushes with a knife. It would be much more obviously rape in a situation of armed assault by a stranger. And yes, I know which is more common. > [@](#): > > It is far too easy to rationalize, to say that if the woman does not fight back it is not real rape, to say that date rape is not as bad, to exaggerate the number of women who file false charges of rape, to say stranger rape is the only real rape. I don’t know of anyone who claims any of this. I certainly don’t. And I don’t think disagreeing with the 1 in 4 statistic means that anyone else is claiming it either. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 12:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/165 "2003-02-27T00:37:40Z")
You can disagree with the 1 in 4 statistic all night, I have no objection. I prefer the 1 in 6 one from the UCLA - Santa Monica Rape Center or whatever it’s called. You may disagree with that one too if you like. I’ve already said that it lines up with my own personal knowledge that one out of every so many women I know have been forced to participate in a sexual act at some point in their lives. (And two men have.) To further clarify that, there is no chance of consent being ambiguous if the victims are under age 12 (and the men are much older) and any penetration whatsoever occurs. It’s rape, every which way, and that alone accounts for over half of the experiences I know of. I’m not including any others where consent is unclear. It adds up to “a lot of women”, IMO. Your own personal knowledge may be much different. Whatever this orthodoxy crap is - I don’t think you’re seeing it here. It’s insulting and unimaginable to think that projecting numbers of victims is considered the sole domain of the feminist movement, which does position itself against men. I do not think having an opinion regarding sexual assault means taking a side in that battle. ---
**Author:** ![Truth\_Seeker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5fc32e/32.png) [@Truth\_Seeker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truth_Seeker)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 1:02am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/166 "2003-02-27T01:02:18Z")
> [@](#): > > \*\*Is your definition of rape so narrow that it only encompasses a penis going into a vagina? \*\* Well, it certainly is for a lot of people. Rape is non-consensual sexual intercourse. “Sexual Intercourse” is > [@](#): > > \*\*Sexual intercourse is pleasing and satisfying sexual needs through mutual orgasm and insertion of the male penis into the female’s vagina. Due to the sharing of bodily fluids pregnancy and disease may occur. \*\* [Sex Ed 101](http://www.personal.psu.edu/faculty/n/x/nxd10/transition/group5/sexdef.html) AFAIK, in most U.S. States, this is the legal definition of sexual intercourse, apart from the mutual orgasm bit, of course. Now, you can define “rape” any way you like. But you **must** clearly define just what it is that you are talking about – especially if you want to throw around statistics documenting the prevalence of rape. > [@](#): > > \*\*Secondly, your ascertation that: > > ## quote: > > ## If a man gets drunk at a party and a women drags him home and forces herself on him, he would be _far more likely_ to brag about the encounter than to feel violated and guilty. > > is insensitive in the extreme. \*\* [Emphasis supplied.] Perhaps it is. Do you deny that it is also true? > [@](#): > > \*\*Just because YOU might brag about some woman forcing herself on you, other man may not. \*\*Just hilarious! What makes you assume I’m male? > [@](#): > > \*\*In Canada there is no crime called ‘rape’, only ‘sexual assault’ with varying degrees of severity (aggrivated, with a weapon, etc). The site is here. > > ## quote: > > ## Under Section 271 – Sexual Assault: Somebody touches you in a sexual way on purpose, directly or indirectly, without your consent. > > I think it’s fantastic, because it saves all that BS about ‘it’s not rape if it’s not penetrative’ etc. _The essential features of rape, as far as I’m concerned, is that it is unwelcome and sexual._ \*\*[Emphasis supplied.] Lots of people agree with you, and that’s the problem. AFAIK, most countries have laws outlawing sexual assault, which is what you describe here. However, if you lump together someone brushing against you on the bus with being dragged into an alley at gunpoint and being forced to have sexual intercourse, you get a completely useless statistic. Unfortunately, if you want to actually understand what’s going on in the world, you have to adequately define your terms. > [@](#): > > \*\*Wait a minute, if a guy rams his penis up my male ass, that isn’t a rape? Boy, I sure bet it would feel like a rape. And if a girl straps on a dildo and shoves it in another girl’s vagina, that isn’t rape? What if the girl straps on a dildo and puts it up my ass, is that rape? (Presuming all nonsensual.) Really confused here, I was under the impression that any sort of penetration, natural or with an object, was rape. I’m pretty sure that’s the definition here in Missouri. \*\* Not really. Different U.S. states have slightly different schemes but your first example is typically called “forcible sodomy.” MO seems to define rape as “non consensual sexual intercourse” but has a different crime category for "non consensual **deviate** sexual intercourse. > [@](#): > > \*\*(1) “Deviate sexual intercourse”, any act involving the genitals of one person and the hand, mouth, tongue, or anus of another person or a sexual act involving the penetration, however slight, of the male or female sex organ or the anus by a finger, instrument or object done for the purpose of arousing or gratifying the sexual desire of any person; \*\* [Deviate Sexual Intercourse in MO](http://www.moga.state.mo.us/statutes/c500-599/5660010.htm) FWIW, the same MO also specifically defines “sexual intercourse” as well. > [@](#): > > \*\*(4) “Sexual intercourse”, any penetration, however slight, of the female sex organ by the male sex organ, whether or not an emission results. \*\* ---
**Author:** ![Truth\_Seeker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5fc32e/32.png) [@Truth\_Seeker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truth_Seeker)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 1:17am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/167 "2003-02-27T01:17:29Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lamia \* > \*\* > > > [@](#): > > > > No, it’s not. It is technically impossible for a women to rape a women, just as it is technically impossible for a man to rape a man. > > Technically impossible under your fanciful personal definition of rape perhaps, but we try to speak standard English around here. It helps avoid confusion. \*\* Perhaps the air is too thin and you’re not getting enough oxygen way up on that high horse of yours. The actual standard definition of “rape” in English is exactly as I have described. Moreover, it’s a commonly used legal definition as well. It is precisely because of this well-understood definition that the word “rape” has such emotional force. That is also why so many people with an agenda want to slip other sex crimes under the same rubric. This is, once again, why people now ask victims what they mean by “rape.” If you say “I was sexually assaulted,” no one knows exactly what you mean. If you say “I was raped.” **Everybody** knows what you mean. Except they don’t really, do they? ---
**Author:** ![Nightime](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e9c0ed/32.png) [@Nightime](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nightime)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 1:57am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/168 "2003-02-27T01:57:01Z")
Truth Seeker: > [@](#): > > Perhaps it is. Do you deny that it is also true? It isn’t true. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 2:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/169 "2003-02-27T02:15:11Z")
This is the MA legal definition of rape: > [@](#): > > Rape is when the offender has ‘sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse with a person and compels such person to submit by force and against his/her will or compels such person to submit by threat of bodily injury’. This definition includes oral and anal intercourse (including fellatio, cunnilingus, and other intrusions of a part of a person’’ body or other object into the genital or anal opening of another person’’ body). The inability of an individual to give consent due to such things as unconsciousness, extreme intoxication or mental impairment can also be classified as rape in limited circumstances. (MGL Chapter 265, §22) …which includes pretty much all forms of penetration. There’s a separate charge for indecent assault & battery: > [@](#): > > Indecent assault and battery is defined as the intentional, offensive touching of a person 14 years of age or older, without their consent. Indecent includes an offensive touching of the breast, abdomen, buttocks, thighs, or genital area. ie. portions of the body considered private. (MGL Chapter 265, §13H) …as well as further classifications for ages of the victims. ---
**Author:** ![coffeecat](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/coffeecat/32/3405_2.png) [@coffeecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/coffeecat)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 3:46am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/170 "2003-02-27T03:46:02Z")
More importantly, both states’ definitions of rape only include acts that we can all agree are serious crimes, regardless of what was decided at the Annual Meeting and Pity Party of the Society for Flaming Pseudofeminist Loons. I think we’re safe from false imprisonment due to an overly broad definition of rape. Whether it’s safe to walk the streets is still up in the air. ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 3:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/171 "2003-02-27T03:59:51Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Truth Seeker \* > \*\*The actual standard definition of “rape” in English is exactly as I have described. > \*\* **OpalCat** cited Webster’s, you cited “Sex Ed 101”. Which one is the more reputable source for standard definitions of English words? ---
**Author:** ![alice\_in\_wonderland](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/alice_in_wonderland/32/176_2.png) [@alice\_in\_wonderland](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/alice_in_wonderland)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 5:54am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/172 "2003-02-27T05:54:05Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Truth Seeker \* > \*\*Perhaps it is. Do you deny that it is also true? \*\* Well, every man I know that has had sex forced on him by a woman has been humiliated and shamed. Each man has felt powerless, and emasculated. "What do you mean? A big strong man like you couldn’t fend off a _WOMAN_??? Each man has worried about STDs, how their partner would react, weather or not they were "_Asking for it."_ So, to sum up, I’m denying it’s true. I think it’s a crock of shit, to be quite honest. Perhaps you hang around a bunch of men that brag about such things. I have never met any in any capacity. > [@](#): > > What makes you assume I’m male? Even if your not - if a woman forces herself on you sexually, degrades you in whatever way she sees fit, spits on you, cuts you, penetrates you analy with whatever is handy, I don’t think you’re going to brag about it to your friends, regardless of your sex. Happy now? ---
**Author:** ![Truth\_Seeker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/5fc32e/32.png) [@Truth\_Seeker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Truth_Seeker)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 5:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/173 "2003-02-27T05:58:26Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Lamia \* > \*\ ***OpalCat** cited Webster’s, you cited “Sex Ed 101”. Which one is the more reputable source for standard definitions of English words? \*\* Actually, I’m curious as to where her definition comes from: It’s not from [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com). In any event, the issue, even for her definition, is what constitutes “sexual intercourse.” The main point, oh insufferable one, is that your unmitigated snottiness is a perfect example of why, “What do you mean by rape?” is a perfectly valid and indeed, necessary, question. Your “commonly understood definition that everyone knows” isn’t. Rape is a term of art. (If necessary, I can repeat this slowly in really large letters since it is apparent that shear repitition isn’t doing the job.) Before you can intelligently talk about things like how many people will be raped, you have to define what you are talking about. Of course, if you prefer just to make emotionally gratifying declamations, no actual data is necessary. > [@](#): > > _originally posted by coffeecat_ > **More importantly, both states’ definitions of rape only include acts that we can all agree are serious crimes** Very true. But so is murder and armed robbery. Nonetheless, I’m not in favour of lumping all this in together for statistical purposes and calling it “rape.” ---
**Author:** ![Lamia](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/8e7dd6/32.png) [@Lamia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lamia)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 3:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/174 "2003-02-27T15:59:42Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Truth Seeker \* > \*\*Actually, I’m curious as to where her definition comes from: It’s not from [dictionary.com](http://dictionary.com). \*\* She got it from Merriam-Webster Online. That’s why I said “OpalCat cited Webster’s”. > [@](#): > > \*\* > In any event, the issue, even for her definition, is what constitutes “sexual intercourse.” \*\* True enough, but it obviously does not limit “sexual intercourse” in the way you have suggested or it would not have said “unlawful sexual intercourse by force or threat other than by a man with a woman”. > [@](#): > > \*\* > The main point, oh insufferable one, is that your unmitigated snottiness is a perfect example of why, “What do you mean by rape?” is a perfectly valid and indeed, necessary, question. \*\* I only see one person here being insufferable and snotty, and it sure isn’t me. I’ve been quite pleasant to you, considering how vicious you are to everyone else. > [@](#): > > \*\* > Your “commonly understood definition that everyone knows” isn’t. \*\* It’s funny how you put that phrase in quotes as if it were something I said. > [@](#): > > \*\* > (If necessary, I can repeat this slowly in really large letters since it is apparent that shear repitition isn’t doing the job.) \*\* I don’t suppose it ever occured to you that we all understand you perfectly well, but we just happen to disagree? Perhaps because you are _wrong_? ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/175 "2003-02-27T17:10:00Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\* It’s rape, every which way, and that alone accounts for over half of the experiences _I know of (emphasis added)_. > \*\* Unfortunately for those who genuinely want to know the incidence of rape, “more than half” of one person’s anecdotal evidence is not very strong to establish very much. > [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Tee \* > \*\* > Whatever this orthodoxy crap is - I don’t think you’re seeing it here. It’s insulting and unimaginable to think that projecting numbers of victims is considered the sole domain of the feminist movement, which does position itself against men. \*\* I _am_ seeing the “orthodoxy crap” here. It consists partly of the feeling that even if a given factoid is utter BS, it should be accepted if it furthers an agenda. It is like the bit they pushed a few years back, that domestic abuse incidents increased during Super Bowl weekend, because men were overdosing on testosterone from professional sports. A nice little shot, implying that football fans were knuckle-dragging Neaderthals, and that if we all became women’s soccer fans, domestic abuse would be reduced. Only trouble being, the statistic was entirely imaginary. Nor do I find any accusations that the feminist movement is the only group fudging the figures to try to gain an advantage. But if, as you say, the feminist movement “does position itself against men”, and when they promulgate a statistic which, upon examination, turns out to be questionable at best, why do so many of the counter-arguments turn out to be, “Well, that’s the way it feels to me, so you must hate women”? That is the part to which I object - the tendency to ask when presented with an alleged fact, not “Is it true or false?” but “Is it _convenient_?” Certainly feminists are not alone in doing this - it is a natural human tendency. But neither are feminists to be supported when they get caught doing it. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![Daikona](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/8baadc/32.png) [@Daikona](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Daikona)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 8:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/176 "2003-02-27T20:22:41Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by FDISK \* > \*\ ***Daikona** : So we’re supposed to believe women when they say they’re victims, but not men? Holy double standards, batman! False claims of rape happen. This is a fact. You wouldn’t claim a rape victim was making it up to get attention, would you? \*\* Quite the opposite in fact. I was more pointing out that people were leaping up to run around going “women lie about that, you know”, but a man claiming something was automatically to be believed. I don’t _know_ the people involved in that incedent, so refuse to come to any conclusion regarding whose story is more believable. But if people’s first response to mention of rape is going to be “women lie about that”, then it strikes me as possible that you’re not believing the guy because his story is plausible so much as because it backs up the claim that hey, women are lying bitches. ---
**Author:** ![Tee](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/73ab20/32.png) [@Tee](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Tee)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 8:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/177 "2003-02-27T20:33:36Z")
> [@](#): > > \*Originally posted by Shodan \* > \*\*But if, as you say, the feminist movement “does position itself against men”, and when they promulgate a statistic which, upon examination, turns out to be questionable at best, why do so many of the counter-arguments turn out to be, “Well, that’s the way it feels to me, so you must hate women”? > > That is the part to which I object - the tendency to ask when presented with an alleged fact, not “Is it true or false?” but “Is it _convenient_?”\*\* I’ve not said or implied anything of the sort. I suspect that the basis for claiming the high numbers are “utter BS” is the simple fact that those saying it don’t know anyone who was raped, or know very few people who were, or know someone who was falsely accused. That’s what I want to know, and that’s pretty much it - we can dismiss the political aspect entirely. on that note though: I watch Pro football. On a good week, I win money on picks. (For that and many other reasons I’m not a poster girl for feminism.) However, it doesn’t necessarily bother me if someone theorized that domestic violence incidents spike during Superbowl weekend. It _might_ be true, a lot of factors converge during big sports events like drinking + gambling + rivalry of whatever sort. If they tried to legislate anything related to that, like some waiting period before the losing fans go home to their wives or something - hah - then yes. We have a problem. But just advancing the theory? Is it written somewhere that we must resist all efforts to define a social problem until someone has arrived at unassailable figures? Or is it just this one issue. “Because if we don’t…the feminists have really won.” Really now, how is that _not_ equally politicizing the issue. ---
**Author:** ![Shodan](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/9f8e36/32.png) [@Shodan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Shodan)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 9:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/178 "2003-02-27T21:20:40Z")
> [@](#): > > I suspect that the basis for claiming the high numbers are “utter BS” is the simple fact that those saying it don’t know anyone who was raped, or know very few people who were, or know someone who was falsely accused. I suspect the basis to be closer to the simple fact that those who came up with the 1 in 4 figure lumped together as “rape” acts under circumstances that no one else would consider rape. To include under ‘rape’ having sex after drinking is beyond the bounds of a reasonable definition of the term. If it is considered ‘rape’ when my wife and I split a bottle of wine and then go to bed, I am astounded that the incidence of ‘rape’ is not close to 100%. The statistic is dismissed as ‘utter BS’, in other words, for the same reasons that any other statistic would be if it were collected under the same circumstances. > [@](#): > > on that note though: I watch Pro football. I don’t, if I can avoid it - I don’t care much about football. > [@](#): > > However, it doesn’t necessarily bother me if someone theorized that domestic violence incidents spike during Superbowl weekend. It _might_ be true, a lot of factors converge during big sports events like drinking + gambling + rivalry of whatever sort. It wouldn’t bother me if someone _theorized_ along those lines. It would bother me, and it did bother me, when some theorized, it was shown to be false, but then people were supposed to accept it as proving something when it was ‘utter BS’. It _might_ be true. But it isn’t. So to reject the factoid tells us nothing about those who prefer truth to fiction. Especially it doesn’t tell us anything about the state of sexism in the US. It does tell something about those who insist on politically correct theories even when they don’t correspond to reality. And even if women chime in on a thread saying, “I was beaten up by my boyfriend on Superbowl weekend, and I think it was because of the football game”, that doesn’t prove the factoid either. Even though it is true that domestic violence is a horrid crime, and even though it is true that the women who chime were really beaten up. Because it is anecdotal evidence, and anecdotal evidence is not good evidence. I’m repeating myself. I’m done with this thread. Thanks for your thoughts. Regards, Shodan ---
**Author:** ![irishgirl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/8edcca/32.png) [@irishgirl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/irishgirl)\ **Post date:** [February 27, 2003, 9:48pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008/179 "2003-02-27T21:48:05Z")
Shodan , i agree that your “splitting a bottle of wine” analogy isn’t rape. of course. however, i can think of a scenario where drunken sex, could indeed be rape. consider a date where the guy is going to the bar and ordering the drinks. maybe the woman has declared that she wants to take things slowly, maybe it’s a first date, maybe he’s not taking chances. and let’s say the guy decides that it would increase his chances of getting laid if she was very drunk. let’s say his date asks for “bacardi and coke”. so he orders double or triple measures for each of her drinks, and singles for his own. she is unaware of his actions. 3 rum and coke drunk in 1 1/2 hours will have a very different effect on most people than 9 rum and cokes drunk in the same time period. would you consider that to be a form of drug rape? after all, he is spiking her drink with the expressed intent of removing her ability to consent. i don’t think this scenario is common, but i’m pretty sure it happens. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/jerks-im-so-happy-for-the-women-you-know/157008.md?page=8)