Re: Date Rape Research Controversy

[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ellen Mercer) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Kate Orman) wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> > > I've just updated my online essay, "The Date Rape Research 
> > > Controversy". Feedback is very welcome. It's here:
> > > 
> > > http://katesfeminist.info/rape/controversy/
> 
> Hi Ellen - thanks for your reply!
> 
> > I spent some time trying to critically evaluate your writings but
> > found it very frustrating. The premise that seems to interest you is
> > to defend the claims of a particular rape 'researcher', Mary Koss.
> > That's fine- I went in waiting to be convinced one way or another.
> > However, the approach you have taken makes it very difficult to
> > determine whether you are correct or not in your assessments of Koss.
> > Instead, you look at the writings of others who have written about
> > Koss, intending to find ways to dismiss the interpretations of the
> > critics and support the interpretations of Koss's supporters.
> 
> Actually, I've read Koss, the critics, and the supporting research 
> for myself. (See the list of citations and further reading.)
> 
> > For example, you assert that Katie Roiphe "may not have read" Koss
> > before attacking her study, and tell us about perceived errors that
> > Roiphe makes in The Morning After.
> 
> They're not "perceived errors", but serious mistakes and distortions, 
> which strongly suggest she relied on Koss' critic Neil Gilbert instead
> of checking the facts for herself.
> 
> > You assert that because you've not
> > identified scientific articles that directly dispute Koss's paper, it
> > follows that "other researchers have repeatedly checked Koss's work
> > and accepted it as valid".
> 
> No, I don't. I state that the other researchers have found her work 
> valid because it's been accepted for publication in numerous
> peer-reviewed scientific journals.

   The basic problem with Koss's work remains regardless of the fact
that it got past peer review in the journals to which it was submited.
The problem is that nowadays even the legal definition of rape, which
was relied upon as a sort of gold standard, is based on quite a lot of
subjective criteria, especially in regard to such things as a verbal
threat and issues of impairment (unable to give consent). Perhaps the
reason that so many "victims" of these rapes did not see what happened
as rape and went on to continue the relationship was that, as a matter
of common sense and decency, it did not feel like rape to them until
they were told that what happened could have met the "legal"
definition of rape if enough could be made of the issues of coercion
and impairment.
   In other words, the argument that Koss makes is still largely
circular and dependent on fairly vague categories of events.
   Also, if a group of college men were asked if they had ever gotten
drunk and been fondled by a woman that they wished not to be touched
by, what do you think the numbers would be? Quite high I bet. Should
you patiently explain to all of them that they were victims of sexual
assault and next time should file charges?

> 
> > The assertion that criticisms of Koss' work
> > (all) come from "outside the scientific field" while listing Playboy
> > as an example seems prejudicial and tendentious.
> 
> It's simply the truth.
> 
> > In other words, the reader is left with the perception that you are
> > going to support Koss's work because you are predisposed to do so,
> > perhaps for quite unscientific reasons. You make a concerted effort to
> > discredit any and all critics, but the defense is not satisfying
> > because the reader is unable to verify what it is that you are calling
> > rape and decide for themselves whether they do or do not agree with
> > that assessment.
> 
> In fact, the definition of rape used by Koss is stated outright in the
> essay, and referred to repeatedly.
> 

   The definition of rape normally used gives women a free pass unless
they use a strap-on.


> > In fact, you actually seem to be dodging this effort,
> > which almost seems dishonest given your underlying premise that rape,
> > including acts that are apparently not always recognized as rapes, are
> > extremely common and have affected very large numbers of women.
> 
> I don't think *you're* being dishonest; I just think you skim-read the
> essay. (Also, and please forgive me if I'm wrong, I think your
> personal experience has led you to be much more concerned about
> protecting men
> from false accusations than protecting women from rape.)
> 

  I think that it is a mistake to try to seperate the two goals.
Nothing will trivialize the whole question in the minds of men faster
than an official indifference to the problem of false accusation.
Presumably, one basic goal of rape prevention is changing the
attitudes that men carry around. Whenever feminists demonize men the
natural response of all men is to think "Hey babe, you are on your
own". That rape (of a stranger) is taken seriously as a major sort of
crime is actually quite dependent on a set of values and attitudes
that do not survive a breakdown in social morale.


> > There are some things that people get upset over when they see this
> > kind of tendentiousness. These are things that you should consider
> > watching out for in the interest not only of being a more effective
> > writer but also of getting at truth itself, rather than just proving a
> > preconceived opinion that may or may not in fact be true. Consider
> > this:
> > 
> > 1. People don't like to come away with the impression that you believe
> > that only crimes against women, violence against women, is worthy of
> > study or concern. Your links pages link to "violence against women"
> > and "violence against women and girls", "toolkits to help prevent
> > violence against women", etc, but there is nothing but a single token
> > "rape of males" link to offer any kind of balance. I think the trend
> > now is to back off from the perception that only violence against
> > women is important- and in favor of the idea that any kind of violence
> > is wrong.
> 
> As I've said, I'm not going to play the "you don't care enough" game. 
> However, I guess you didn't follow the "token" link on male rape,
> which
> leads to my Web site on the subject, including links to help,
> information,
> and my own bibliography on the subject. You may also be interested in
> my
> essay on why feminists should be concerned about male rape:
> 
> http://katesfeminist.info/almanac/greer.html
> 
> > 2. Many men are frightened and concerned about the fact that they are
> > socially expected to be the aggressor in a relationship- given the
> > virtual certainty that if they don't aggressively court women
> > romantically, they will not get any woman because the aggressive males
> > will get them all. The impression is rather widespread now among men
> > and women that "rape" can now be claimed by any woman who gets herself
> > intoxicated at a party and partakes of sex that she later regrets.
> > What can you offer men as evidence that you are not taking that
> > stance? Please don't cite the "legal definition of rape" because that
> > definition definitely can, in practice, encompass the above scenario.
> 
> Again, I guess you just skim-read the essay, which states clearly that
> regret does not equal rape.
> 
> > 3. The above two points speak to a larger issue: it is just inhumane
> > to fail to consider the forces and pressures experienced by both
> > sexes, rather than this singular concern for the wellbeing of only one
> > sex. Anything that you can offer to show that you've thought through
> > the man's POV and care about him and not only women would greatly
> > increase your effectiveness.
> >
> > 4. You offer some safety tips, through links, for preventing rape.
> > That is fine, but they avoid the subject of the kinds of things that
> > women can do that can put men into the ambiguous situations (e.g., the
> > intoxicated woman who's consented but might later decide that she was
> > raped) that terrify them. In other words, your links are very
> > consistent about the causes of rape: men, violent men, men who "don't
> > listen to women", "thoughtless, uncaring men" who "don't believe it
> > when a woman says no", but never "women who put men in ambiguous
> > situations which may lead to FRAs", "women who use their sexuality or
> > threats of false accusations to create legal problems", etc. The truth
> > is that women are an equal partner in most relationships, good and
> > bad, and the constant reference to women as innocent victims and men
> > as violent abusers just perpetuates the kind of thing that you seek to
> > avoid.
> 
> Sadly, when it comes to rape, most of the victims are women and almost
> all the perpetrators are men. When one is discussing the rape of
> women,
> it's impossible to avoid talking about men as criminals and women as 
> victims.
> 
> However, I think you've also skim-read the "safety tips" I link to.
> For
> example:
> 
> http://ub-counseling.buffalo.edu/coercion.shtml
> 
> This gives good advice *for men* on avoiding "ambiguous situations" -
> for example, when uncertain if a woman is consenting, simply to ask
> her. It
> makes the law clear, so a man can't get himself into trouble through 
> ignorance of what constitutes rape.
> 
> Or how about this one:
> 
> http://www4.nau.edu/fronske/brochures/rape.html
> 
> Which advises women to "communicate clearly", "be assertive", "Mean
> what
> you say", "don't send mixed signals"?
> 
> I don't see a men-evil, women-helpless mentality at work here -
> rather, I
> see activists trying to help both sexes prevent rape. Seems sensible
> to
> me.
> 
> > Well you asked for feedback. I hope it helps.
> 
> Not much, I'm afraid. If you have time to read the essay more
> carefully,
> I'd be grateful for feedback on its actual contents, rather than
> generally
> on whether I'm nice enough to men.
> 
> Yours,
> - Kate Orman