Christina Sommers on the election

Believe what you choose, however that is the basis of rape laws in England. It was also a fairly reliable way of forcing a woman to marry you against her will.

In 1828 rape was classed as a felony, punishable by death but still legal within marriage, in 1968 the distinction between misdemeanour and felony was got rid of and it was punishable by imprisonment, but a woman still couldn't be raped by her husband which only became a crime in 1991.

One in 16 men is not a "small minority". Even 1 in 50 isnt low.

And obviously there are serial offenders. Seems odd to me that a man would rape once then grow a conscience about it. Especially given how low the conviction rate is.

Do you think the estimate for the number of women who have been raped is too high? Or that there are more male rapists out there than research shows?

Mostly

I am sure you are aware that the NPR survey is not the only one and other studies have produced figures that suggest something like 1 in 50. Ms Sommers herself has written debunking these findings herself I see.

I don't understand - either there is a rape culture or there is a small minority of serial offenders. I thought that latter view was not popular in feminist circles ?

Xeno

I don't agree with you that that is the reason we have rape laws. If that were true they would be removed from the statute book now that women are no longer considered mens property.

Sorry,*men were only jailed. i.e. Rape was a crime because women were property.

(Am trying to write the world's dullest report and my brain has gone to sleep)

Men are only jailed for rape because rape was once a crime against property (in the U.K.) and stealing was a hanging offence. Technically, when a man raped a woman he was either "stealing" her virginity and therefore her marriagability from her father or her virtue from her husband.

Town of 2000 people (half men, half women) - so the one in four figure for women gives you 250 women.

Let's take Lisak's figure down to 5% i.e. one in 20, so 50 rapists. 6 rapes each - that's 300 rapes, closer to 1 woman in 3 (hence my comment about some women being unfortunate enough to be raped twice). Yes, the figures do work, once one realises that it is women, i.e. half the population, to whom the 1 in 4 figure applies. My point is that the figures look ball-park the same whether you arrive at them by counting up what women say about their experiences, or what men are prepared to disclose about their actions - so you have two independent research methodologies giving broadly the same answer as to the prevalence of rape in the population.

NPR article on campus rape

He [Lisak] found them by, over a 20-year period, asking some 2,000 men in college questions like this: "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?"

Or: "Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn't want to because you used physical force [twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.] if they didn't cooperate?"

About 1 in 16 men answered "yes" to these or similar questions.

Profile Of A Rapist

It might seem like it would be hard for a researcher to get these men to admit to something that fits the definition of rape. But Lisak says it's not. "They are very forthcoming," he says. "In fact, they are eager to talk about their experiences. They're quite narcissistic as a group — the offenders — and they view this as an opportunity, essentially, to brag."

This seems to show a spectacular misunderstanding of the nature of date rape.

Perhaps, but none the less the logical conclusion of this is that out of 2000 people, 500 women were raped by the same 80 men. That suggests a very high level of general inter mingling. Or to put it another way if you live in a town with 10,000 people, there will be 2 and half thousand women who have been raped, the rapists number just 400 - they require a pretty broad reach to sustain that. The other conclusion is that in order for the 1 in 4 figure to be correct then you need far more than just 1 in 20 men who rape.

Scallops
I don't think I am doing anyone a disservice, it's equally not true to say men were forced to capitulate into jailing each other for raping women.

Yes, that's right. I was raped by a man who had invited me in for a chat, and by a man when I was asleep in his lodgings because I couldn't sleep at mine. His mate had got off with my mate and they were in my shared room. The indecent assault was when someone I thought I could trust was driving me home.

Both the rapes happened when I was travelling, which tends to make you vulnerable. I couldn't face dealing with police in a foreign country.

I had a memorable rape escape that still fills me with satisfaction. I was talking to a new arrival in my home town at a party where I knew everyone. Turned out we lived in the same direction, quite a long walk. I made sure during our chat and stroll that he knew I was in a committed relationship so not available. We got to his, he suggested a coffee, I reminded him I wasn't single, he acknowledged. Opened door for me, and as soon as he was inside he calmly locked the door, saying "You can have this the easy way or the hard way."

I took a deep breath and said "Everyone saw you leave with me, and if you do anything to me i will walk into the pub tomorrow and tell everyone about it. I've slept with a lot of men in this town. I'm friends with all of them and they know I wouldn't invent anything. They will be very angry ." I was cold as ice and totally collected.

We stared at each other and then he slowly unlocked the door and stood aside. Next day I went to the pubs I used and told everyone what had happened. Also pointed out he must have succeeded with his routine in the past to get it so slick. I heard he was told he wasn't welcome anywhere. He actually had to leave town. He'd moved there very recently. Makes you wonder of his previous place had got too hot for him.

It was great and it confirmed my faith in my old lovers. Kinda gave me my power back after the other stuff. I had quite a number of friends with benefits growing up. They knew I was very open about my sexuality and had zero interest in lying about such matters.

The trouble is that this implies that the 1 in 20 men who are rapists are spectacularly successful at getting women into bed unless they are "stranger rapists" ?

This seems to show a spectacular misunderstanding of the nature of date rape. Men who commit date rape don't come with the mark of Cain stamped on their forehead - they come across as perfectly nice ordinary guys - until they get you alone (not "into bed", simply alone). You think you've gone for a cup of coffee in their student digs (because actually most of us, even rad feminists, have male friends we like and trust and are happy to have cups of coffee with, alone, on the expectation that it really is just a cup of coffee) - and then they rape you. Or a hundred and one variations on the cup of coffee scenario.

In fact, have you read the Femicide Census Report (I'm currently reading it)? From the Global Study for Homicide 2011, homicides have decreased globally but the murders of women have increased. Overwhelmingly the perpetrators of murders are men.

It really isn't women who need to be nicer.

I have been raped twice and seriously sexually assaulted. Each of the three men were acquaintances. I am not surprised by the number of men who admit to committing rape. It tallies with my experience. In each case I would not have been in the room or in the car if they had been total strangers.

I think you are doing women a disservice there girlwiththeflaxenhair. None of the rights that women have fought for have been granted by men out of the goodness of their hearts. They have all had to be fought for, sometimes violently. Certainly with threats.

Men have had millennia of women being nice to them and they still didn't see fit to treat us as equal human beings worthy of the same respect as us. What makes you think that way is going to work now?

I do agree that a right that can be taken away is not really a right. It is the same with all oppressive struggles though. There is always that danger of backlash when the oppressors thinks you are just getting a bit too uppity and put you down again. That's way the oppressive structures need to be removed.

Well - it depends what women you talk to I suppose, that is the thing.

1 in 4 women as victims of that roughly 1 in 20 men

The trouble is that this implies that the 1 in 20 men who are rapists are spectacularly successful at getting women into bed unless they are "stranger rapists" ? 25% of women in other words are basically sleeping with the same guy if you reduce the sample size ? Have i not understood that ?

Sommers would engage in what you would call "whataboutery" I expect and point out that men are the ones who do dangerous jobs that women have no interest in getting into. She would say that a small pay gap is not important when men are being "mangled" at work in jobs women simply do not want to do.

As for the idea the feminists need to be nicer, I feel conflicted about this. Although its not popular to say so, most rights are granted by the powerful rather than being won by the powerless. e.g. William Wilberforce - his statue is deserved and doesn't IMO discredit the slaves who fought for their own emancipation. Maybe I am too cynical, but I am with George Carlin on the issue of rights - something is not really a right if someone can take it away from you, men need to be on board in order for feminism to succeed and sadly it appears that many of them are feeling that they don't want to be on board with it ?

Honestly, I don't even mind feeding it because I actually feel a bit sorry for the op

This comment really confirms Pink's point. "It" - just because Pink does not go with the favoured radical feminist line she must be a troll and can be referred to as "it".

We seem to be slightly at cross purposes, girl. I picked up on Sommers' claim that the pay gap was a myth because in my experience it isn't - my employer has done an internal audit, by job class, and shown that it's very much in place in my workplace. A few years back there was a study of all the universities in the UK showing women were paid less than men, not simply because there were more male professors, but actually paid differently at each grade up the pay scale (lecturer A, lecturer B, senior lecturer, reader, professor). Yet people like Sommers keep coming along and saying "the pay gap is a myth" and claiming it's down to women choosing to do less well paid jobs (ignoring the fact that there's an interesting question in and of itself as to why the "traditionally female" jobs like nursing, librarianship, teaching, etc, are paid less than "traditionally male" ones requiring similar levels of skill and training - to go back to Dagenham in the 1970s, why was spraying paint on a car seen as more skilled work than machining the seat covers?)

The rape/sexual assault statistics - again, an interesting one. I'm inclined to put more faith in the 1 in 4 statistic simply because you can arrive at it via two independent methodologies. Either ask women directly. Or do as David Lisak (American criminal psychologist) does, and ask men. He finds that when given anonymous questionnaires, approximately 6% of men on American campuses will admit to behaviours which meet the legal definition of rape, with an average of 6 rapes each to their names. So (allowing for the fact that some women are unlucky enough to be raped more than once), 1 in 4 women as victims of that roughly 1 in 20 men's repeat offending sounds about right to me.

I think our misunderstanding arose because I was wondering why Pink hadn't addressed the substantive comments I made about Sommers' article, choosing only to home in on the "women need to be nicer" (which I'll agree was a bit flippant - but it is tiresome continually to be told that you need to be nice - does this get said to other civil rights movements?)

...an obviously i need to stop using the word obviously so often...sigh

Hoff Sommers is a slightly odd one, she's obviously a fairly intelligent woman not sure why she really thinks modern feminism needs to be made great when she seems obviously not really a feminist.

Mostly

Sommers obviously thinks the pay gap is a myth, she covers it in her article in the bit about repeating fallacies i.e. that 1 in 4 women will be raped based on the extrapolation of some college study. I did find the bit about white men being less likely to go to college that hispanic or native american women interesting, and it highlights the problem I have with privilege theory, is that now these stats are out there, white men can start saying that in this regard they are under privileged, I believe that the most privileged sector of american society is asians anyway ?

Pink as I wasn't referring to you specifically, I would have to suggest that it's not me who is throwing the tantrum here. But you are absolutely free to be rude about me if it makes your day brighter.

Have fun.

At a very basic level i agree with poochs definition of a feminist

So if someone asked me if i was a feminist i would say yes

I wouldnt say no because of some plonker on the internet or because one strand of feminism i didnt agree with

In the same way that i wouldn't expect a christian to hide that because there are some extremists around

And women should be diplomatic and less extreme? As devi said is that all women or just feminists (i know you said feminists i am just checking...so is that feminists who admit it out loud or all women just in case they are feminists)

I do agree with pink re sommers

I find it interesting that the only one of my comments re Hoff Sommers' s article that Pink picked up on was the somewhat tongue in cheek comment about women just need to be nicer. No mention of the pay gap or (in the current political climate in the US) her omission of reproductive rights.

This isn't even effective trolling.

Honestly, I don't even mind feeding it because I actually feel a bit sorry for the op.

Feminism is good op! You are wrong! Enjoy! =)

Pink, I was asking you. Are you a feminist?

I am very aware that there are many strands of feminism, not all of which I agree with, and that there are also a people and organisations who call themselves feminist, but who really aren't - such as Hoff Summers and Everyday Feminism. It's not a question of disagreeing with their brand of feminism, but more that it doesn't hit the very low bar of being even vaguely feminist, which is that it needs to understand the historical disadvantages that affect women, centre women, take women's concerns seriously, and want to do something about fixing them. If it's not doing that, it ain't feminism, it's some sort of neo-liberalist individualism, most likely, or just ramblings that someone hasn't really thought through (hard to tell the difference between those two).

Should I be taking you seriously, pink? Do you actually want to discuss these things or just snipe?

Not sure the implication is that you shouldn't come on here to be fair, more, stop acting like an utter fuckwit and throwing tantrums if your views aren't immediately capitulated to. I might be wrong.