Rape being re-defined by Senator Akin

And this is where lies the problems with these “statistics”. It preys on cultural perceptions to draw a scenery under a new perception that didn't exist before.

The sources of their claim are the governmental researches on the subject. They don't do any research at all, they just read the government researches and post back their own selection and understanding of it, and is in this process that the meaning of concepts starts to change.

For example, in their documents they use a lot of the words “rape” and “sexual assault”. Rape and Sexual Assault (for which the government documents refers to) are two different things, they are not synonyms, not legally or culturally. A Rape is a forceful sexual intercourse, a sexual intercourse without consent, while a Sexual Assault can also be a Sexual Harassment, being any kind of unwanted sexual contact, as minor as it can be. Rape is a form of Sexual Assault, but not every Sexual Assault will be Rape. This distinction is not well clarified in their presentation of data, much to the contrary, they present the data in a way that makes an unaware reader start to think that Sexual Assault and Rape are the same thing, when in fact they greatly differ.

Their own definition of is “Sexual Assault is unwanted sexual contact that stops short of rape or attempted rape. This includes sexual touching and fondling.” This definition is not presented together with the Sexual Assault Data to make a clear understanding, they simply present the data of Rape and Sexual Assault all together, without clarifying a distinction (which is very clear in the government documents). So when someone goes to their site and reads that “every two minutes someone is sexually assaulted” without the clear distinction and together with the Rape Statistics, it gives a sense that every two minutes someone will be tied to a bed and raped by a guy with a knife, when the two minutes is just implying that every two minutes someone will suffer a sexual assault, going from a full threat of sexual violence and blackmail to a mistaken breast grab, wolf-whistle or short attempt of seduction. Actually, when they talk about this data in specific they say “There is an average of 207,754 victims (age 12 or older) of rape and sexual assault each year.“ No, there isn't an average of 207,754 rape cases each year. There is 207,754 sexual assault cases each year, for which a portion of them are rape.

And as typical, this data is always manipulated in a way that it looks more impressive at a certain angle that will help a certain political instance. For example, yes, statistically speaking, 207,754 sexual assault per year will mean a sexual assault every two minutes. Impressive isn't it? Just think about it, an anime episode which you spent 22 minutes watching means that 11 individuals were sexually assaulted (or raped, according to them) while you were watching it. Also, statistically speaking, 207,754 in a population of 314,296,000 (three hundred and fourteen million) represents 0,06% of that population. It certainly destroys the perception that if you go to a university 43% of the males in an university will try to force sex on you. When confronted with that, feminists in general will obviously point out that no matter how low the percentage is, rape is rape and it is bad. And I certainly agree, but does that make it ok to leave scientific honesty behind and manipulate the presentation of data in a way that creates a sense of danger larger than there actually is? I guess not, science is committed with truth, not politics.



And that is exactly why it doesn't make sense to show those statistics as “proof of rape culture”, because most of those who answered were likely not thinking about rape. The word deserve, culturally speaking, has a broad meaning, not exactly meaning that someone has the right to something no matter what but that he should receive something because of something he did, not that he is entitled to take that something by force. A husband who invests all his money in pleasing his wife and worked for her certainly deserves to receive something back, which might as well be sex as any other thing, and no matter what the wife says he will still deserve something back because what the wife says doesn't change what he has done for her. But to say he deserves something doesn't mean that he is entitled to take it by force. To say he deserves it would only mean that he did something and should receive something back (a cultural perception of balance). If he doesn't receive that which he deserves, it would account for an injustice, an unbalance, but not that he has the right to take what he deserves by force. Such questions, very common in this type of researches, are in fact badly formulated. A more direct and righteous approach would be “Does X have the right to have sex with Y in a occasion which Y does not consent, while Dating, Married, Sex Prior, etc?” then you would have a true account of how society in general perceives rape because only then the implications would be direct.

Not even going to point that to ask this question to kids would be totally misguided. Sex is a taboo subject when near children, even to explain to them what is sex is very complicated, let alone make them understand how bad is rape being that between 11-14 their sense of identity (morals and values) is still on formation and can easily change. It's like asking them if they're ok with capital punishment, even if they have an opinion, their opinion doesn't have any substantial basis and can easily change. It is by no means a sample of adult society mindset. Only maybe how our culture affects our kids, but it isn't to say that because someone thinks rape is ok when 11 he will think rape is ok when 20,30,40,50,60 or whatever.

Rape statistics are very hard to compute because the line is badly drawn, and most of researches are politically motivated or emotionally conducted (should I remember Planned Parenthood frauds?). I don't even see what is the point of bringing it here to this discussion. Akin was talking about how pregnancies from rapes are low on statistics (this is something which can be disputed), not that there is or there is not a rape culture.

Akin may have made an error of speech (and let's be honest: not many buy into the "magical pregnancy-stopping mechanism" theory of rape pregnancy), but the very reason that people can be basically told of cases of rape (in other words) and not recognize them AS rape is a cultural problem.

Which is exactly what we need to seek to change: educate about what rape is. It's not some "ooooh only horrible criminals do this!" crime, it's one committed by a staggering number of "normal" people.

Any crime committed by a person, has degenerated in some form(be it mild, or he was already degenerate to the point of not longer being human), I submit that every criminal is not "normal". A "normal" person doesn't allow one's perception of reality to inflict harm on others, or sees their perception as totally different from the rest of reality.

I think everyone in America knows what rape is, you never addressed 42's point: It might look like a really big number, but it's not. We live in a society of mostly "normal" people, so making a big deal out of a few thousand is really pointless.

Infact, isn't there a statistic that says that a sexual predator who got away once is likely to strike again? I bring that up to say: What we need to reform is our prisons, we're degenerating their lives even further, promoting them in fact to further criminal activity.

Either we take reform seriously, or do the Light Yagami thing. But just locking them up and throwing away the key hasn't been successful.

...you did read what you just wrote, correct?
How can prisons even contain them IF THEY ARE NEVER CAUGHT/ARRESTED/TRIED?

Again, I offer this info from RAINN:


NINE. NINE of 100 get ANY prosecution.

The prisons work (well, as much as they can) once they're in for life. The problem lies in testing rape kits, taking victims seriously, and making victims feel safer in reporting processes.

That's the thing, that's the ONLY time they actually work(when they're in for life), and not even: Should a criminal escape, the first thing he'll do is commit another crime. Prisons are a gigantic failure because they fail to reform the inmate, or do anything productive at all really. If we treat criminals as animals, let's take it a step further and go Light Yagami-ism.

It actually worked, because when people noticed "Oh, hey, shit, there's a consequence for our crimes besides getting free food, gymanastics, etc." They put a value on our lives and on society.

And I'd like to think that our police forces take victims seriously, the problem is with identifying the perpertrator, and the natural secrecy of the crime of rape itself. Name a rapist DUMB enough to rape, out in the open?

Can it get better? Of course, but let's not portray(as you've tried miserably), that America, the world just loves seeing rape.

That's the thing, that's the ONLY time they actually work(when they're in for life), and not even: Should a criminal escape, the first thing he'll do is commit another crime. Prisons are a gigantic failure because they fail to reform the inmate, or do anything productive at all really. If we treat criminals as animals, let's take it a step further and go Light Yagami-ism.

It actually worked, because when people noticed "Oh, hey, shit, there's a consequence for our crimes besides getting free food, gymanastics, etc." They put a value on our lives and on society.

And I'd like to think that our police forces take victims seriously, the problem is with identifying the perpertrator, and the natural secrecy of the crime of rape itself. Name a rapist DUMB enough to rape, out in the open?

Can it get better? Of course, but let's not portray(as you've tried miserably), that America, the world just loves seeing rape.

This article is a decent read regarding rape, its definition, and laws pertaining to it. Hope you guys won't mind the long read, I just thought it would be informative.
http://www.economist.com/node/21561883