rapehysteria

Don’t be that anti-rape campaign

Editor’s Note: This is the transcript of the video by Karen Straughan that AVfM published here a few days ago. We note again that Karen often goes off-page when performing her videos and so there may be small differences between the two versions. Additionally, the editors at AVfM have added some links to the events that Karen describes herein.

Okay, it’s been a crazy week, for sure.

I know I don’t have to inform many people of the frothy-with-outrage turd that hit the media fan middle of last week, when a Women’s Studies professor, among others, took offence to some posters my brothers-in-arms dared to put up on the University of Alberta campus.

The posters were a parody/criticism of the popular “Don’t Be That Guy” poster campaign, which reminds men it’s wrong and a crime to put your penis in girls who are so drunk they’ve passed out or are otherwise unable to resist. Men’s Rights Edmonton’s posters aimed a different message at a different type of criminal–women who make false rape accusations–admonishing women to “Don’t Be That Girl”.

Women’s Studies Professor Lise Gotell claimed that our posters are “rape apology”. I have no idea how a poster raising awareness of some situations where an accusation is made but no rape has occurred is rape apology. If no rape occurred, there is no rape to apologize or make excuses for.

Other feminists, politically correct politicians and slaves to their reptilian brains claimed the campaign “blames victims for their rapes”. Um, guys, in a false accusation, there is no rape victim to blame, only a false accuser. The ACTUAL victim of a false accusation is the person accused.

Karen Smith, a sexual assault advocate/counsellor emphasized how brave a victim has to be to go to strangers and have them physically and mentally probe you about things that happened to the most intimate parts of your body, which is certainly true. What does not follow is her assertion that that’s why people “just don’t lie” about rape.

Well, Ms. Smith, setting aside the fact that according to the police, at least 1-2% of the women who engage the process clearly do lie about rape, well, if nothing bad had happened to the most intimate parts of your body–that is, if there was no rape–the process would be a very different experience, wouldn’t it? Ms. Smith seems so obsessed with the experiences of victims, she is unable to detach the victim experience from that of a non-victim. She actually seems to believe non-victims would feel all the same things when going through the process that victims do, which really makes me wonder.

For a malicious false accuser, the rape kit would be no different from a pap-smear and pelvic exam, something most women submit to on a regular basis. In fact, given the reason for the physical exam, I would hazard to guess a rape kit would be less brusque and more gentle than a yearly physical. For a malicious false accuser, the interviews with police would be little more than an exercise in amateur theater. Seriously, does Ms. Smith think that every actress who portrays a rape victim on Law and Order experiences the simulated “gruelling process” the way a real victim experiences the real thing? If they did, how would producers ever find enough actresses willing to take those roles?

Other types of false accusers would experience the process yet other ways. For the narcissistic accuser who makes a false complaint for attention, she will be experiencing it the way a sufferer of Münchausen syndrome experiences unnecessary medical testing–with a sick thrill. For the false accuser who is covering up an infidelity or explaining away an STD [Sexually Transmitted Disease] or pregnancy, the process will be experienced as the unpleasant but necessary means to solve a bigger problem.

Ms. Smith’s faulty logic is what happens when you spend your entire life looking at only one problem, studying only one phenomenon from only one angle to the exclusion of everything else, until you reach a point where you cram all experiences into one narrow model.

“It just doesn’t happen,” she insists. Because the process for real victims is so gruelling.

Perhaps Karen Smith needs to talk to Soner Yasa, an Edmonton cab driver falsely accused of sexual assault in 2006 by 4 female passengers out clubbing. Their reason for making the accusation? Yasa had told one of them to put out her cigarette, as smoking in taxi cabs is illegal. They then demanded to be dropped off, and refused to pay the $13 cab fare. When Yasa protested, they called their friends and told them Yasa had sexually assaulted them. The cabbie called police when a mob began to form, and the women repeated their accusation to the responding officer, who filed a report on the incident.

But what do you know? Yasa had a camera installed in his cab, which had recorded the entire trip, and provided incontrovertible evidence that the women had made up the accusation out of whole cloth.

Why would a woman lie about rape to police, wonders Karen Smith? To save $13 bucks, apparently.

Or because a man threw a flower at her; because she was bored; to divert her parents’ attention from her failing grades; because a man she’d had a one-off a couple of weeks before forgot her name when they ran into each other; to convince her husband to move to a better neighborhood; because she didn’t want to pay for a cab and knew the police would drive her home; so the police wouldn’t drop her off at the psychiatric ward again; because she didn’t want to admit to her boyfriend that she’d spent the night cheating on him with three men.

A lesbian activist in the U.S. carved Christian symbols into her own body and claimed three white, Christian men had broken into her home, assaulted, tortured and raped her. Irony of ironies, she staged the attack to draw attention to the cause of fighting homophobia and violence against women.

For a woman willing to carve her own body up to make a martyr of herself, is the gruelling nature of the process of reporting really going to be a deterrent? Is it, when a different false accuser is prepared to engage this gruelling process just to get a free lift home, or to get out of paying $13.

One of the ladies who accused Soder Yasa was kind enough to phone police the next morning to apologize for the trouble and to assure them that none of the women were planning on going through the “gruelling process” of pursuing a sexual assault charge against Yasa. Hah!

Cream on the cake? The police refused to pursue charges against the women for making a false accusation, despite Yasa’s urging, despite incontrovertible proof they were lying, and despite the fact that that evidence was all that saved HIM from having to go through his own “gruelling process”–the process of defending himself not just to the justice system, but to friends, family, neighbors and present and future employers.

In light of that, I’d be very interested to know how the Edmonton Police Service classifies a false complaint. Would Yasa’s case fall into that 1 or 2% of sexual assault complaints where evidence of falsity is so obvious, the police trip over it while looking for evidence of veracity? Or was it not even counted because the women never filed an official complaint of sexual assault, and it was never passed on to a dedicated sex assault investigator?

I wonder, too, how Karen Smith, victim advocate, thinks a rape victim might feel or react if police said to her, “Well, sure we know he raped you. We have air-tight evidence on video. But we think pursuing a prosecution would send too troubling a message to victims of other crimes, so yeah. We’re just going to let it drop.” Because that’s exactly the mentality behind the Edmonton Police’s refusal to press charges in Yasa’s case.

City councillor and mayoral hopeful Don Iveson called the “Don’t Be That Girl” posters “morally indefensible”. Um…explain how? Please. Because the ONLY reason I can think of that our posters are morally indefensible is the same reason the original ones are–that it associates the behavior of a small percentage of a group of people to the group itself. The only difference being that men are a much higher percentage of rape victims and women a much higher percentage of perpetrators than the original posters would indicate, while false rape accusations are a predominantly female phenomenon. Even if our posters are as morally indefensible as the originals, at least they’re accurate.

The Edmonton Police Service said the posters “demeaned and belittled” rape victims. You know what, EPS? I’ve talked to a few rape victims, and if there’s one person they typically hate almost as much as a rapist, it’s a false rape accuser. Women who make false accusations–who appropriate the horrible thing that some unfortunate women experience, and exploit that horrible thing to get out of paying $13–THOSE are the people demeaning and belittling the experiences of rape victims. And by extension, a justice system that refuses to punish women who lie about rape is demeaning and belittling the experiences of rape victims, and allowing false accusers to damage the credibility of every legitimate victim without any accountability for the harm they do. And it demeans and belittles a justice system that is supposed to protect ALL victims, including victims of false accusations.

Pretending women never lie about rape is not only dishonest, it sends a despicable message to victims. “Women never lie about rape,” tells victims they should always be believed, on the spot, and therefore the normal investigative process is a revictimization rather than a necessary evil. It tells them that when the police ask questions they have to ask, to ferret out details, detect inconsistencies and test the veracity of the claim, it’s not because some women lie and investigators are performing due diligence, but because the police are intentionally making the process more difficult than it has to be, and obviously don’t want to help them.

As for the real reason everyone involved lost their shit over these posters, I personally think it’s a reflection of the age-old double standard. There is no social taboo against attacking men, so it’s okay to imply that without constant reminding, ordinary guys will just go around raping left, right and center because they’re too stupid to understand what consent is, or they’re so sex-obsessed they’ll be interested in sex with a woman whose physical state is that of a half-inflated sex-doll, only with the bonus feature of being able to puke all over him.

In fact, because of the double standard, this message is lauded high and low as a positive one.

But apply the exact same reasoning and method to remind women that making a false rape accusation is a crime, and people act like you’ve just tossed a kitten in a blender and hit frappe. You are not allowed to even acknowledge the small percentage of women who dishonestly and callously exploit society’s justifiable contempt for men who rape, for revenge, an alibi or attention. Any acknowledgement that some small percentage of women are shitty enough to lie about rape is translated as an attack on all women, especially rape victims. The very fact that some people have interpreted the posters as saying that all rape accusations are false is a silent condemnation of the originals as saying that all men would rape if you only just forget to remind them not to every 15 minutes.

As for the legitimacy of our campaign–it’s a legitimate criticism of that double standard, and has hopefully led to a lot more public criticism of another double standard–how the system treats crime depending on the sex of the victim. I mean, heck, what’s the problem with sacrificing a cab driver or some other penis-bearing schmuck here and there by denying them justice and refusing to hold false accusers accountable (or even acknowledge they exist), if there’s even the tiniest chance it might convince more women to report their rapes? It might destroy a few men’s lives, but if there’s any chance at all that it will help a few women, then it’s all evened out.

And frankly, while it may arguably be that people differ on what they think of as sexual assault, EVERYONE knows that the thing called sexual assault, however defined, is a crime. But judging by the outcome of the Soder Yasa case, even the police don’t know making a false complaint of rape is a crime. And judging by the female passengers’ very generous decision to not charge the cab driver with sexual assault after video evidence exonerated him and IMPLICATED THEM, there are plenty of women who apparently don’t realize it’s a crime, either.

Anyway. This entire kerfuffle has got me thinking more about the “don’t be that guy” campaign, and all the reasons I believe it’s not the “positive message” its proponents believe it is. Not even for women.

People who are familiar with me will know why “don’t be that guy” is a negative message for men. It paints all men as potential sexual predators. It smears all men with the stain of a behavior confined to a small percentage of men and women, and associates masculinity, rather than narcissism and sociopathy, with rape.

It does nothing to address the responsibility of women for keeping themselves safe, especially when they’re drinking, but instead pretends that if we just bludgeon men long enough with this particular message women will eventually just BE safe. It portrays women as toddlers who can’t be trusted to drink responsibly or plan ahead, and portrays men as rapists or rapists-in-waiting.

Like nearly every feminist-spearheaded awareness campaign regarding sexual assault, it ignores the problem of sexual assaults against men, as well as those committed by women. In the kabuki play of sexual assault discourse, the only role available for men is perpetrator, and the only role available for women is victim.

This is really all just the same old bullshit that MRAs have been talking about for god only knows how long, despite all the efforts by feminists to scream us out of the discussion.

But I also wanted to get into a few of the reasons that “don’t be that guy” is, in my opinion, a misleading, misguided and potentially harmful message to send *to women*.

First, it assumes that there exists some vast number of men who just don’t understand consent. Who don’t realize that molesting a passed out woman, or that getting a woman so drunk she can’t physically resist when you hold her down and fuck her is morally wrong, and a crime. It also assumes there is a vast number of men who, when an enthusiastically consenting woman is unavailable to them, will go ahead and have sex with one who is borderline comatose, drooling and possibly covered in her own vomit. This can only generate a fear in women that is very much misplaced.

Even setting aside question of how well men understand or don’t understand consent, or whether they do or don’t think sex with an incapacitated woman is rape (or a different crime, or wrong, or gross, or mean–something feminists never seem to ask in their surveys), the concept behind the “don’t be that guy” posters depends on the assumption that there is this huge population of men who are interested enough in sex with an unconscious woman, or one who is not enjoying herself but unable to fend off his advances, that lots of them might be willing to give it a try, at least once.

And this is simply not the case.

Researcher Dr. David Lisak, who has done extensive study on “undetected rapists” on campuses, says schools put too much faith in “teachable moments”, and too much stock in the idea that a rapist is a man who just “made a terrible mistake or error in judgment, and can learn to be a better person out of it.” According to Lisak’s analysis of the self-reported rapes of college men, the one-time offender who learned his lesson, at best, represents 1/3 of offenders, 2% of all men, and is responsible for only 10% of college rapes.

Now maybe these guys, this 2% of men, are guys who don’t understand consent, or don’t know it’s a crime, or who can learn a lesson and go on to be a better person after realizing they hurt someone. I say maybe, because to my knowledge, Lisak hasn’t portrayed them this way. Regardless, they are responsible for only 10% of college rapes.

The other 90% of college rapes are perpetrated by repeat offenders. 2/3 of offenders–just 4% of the general population of men–commit nearly all the rapes on campus.

Not just that, this 4% of the men in the sample committed 28% of all the other self-reported violence, such as slapping an intimate partner, minor sexual assaults like groping, general assault, or abusing children.

These are men who hurt people, who know they’re hurting people, and who do it anyway.

And while Lisak acknowledges these men do not typically describe what they do as rape, they seem very, very aware that their victims are not consenting. They brag about how clever they are in circumventing a victim’s ability to refuse consent. They talk about targeting the most vulnerable women, and maneuvering and manipulating them in ways that make them even more immediately vulnerable, and about the measures they take afterward to discourage their victims from reporting the sex as an assault.

How do they convince victims not to tell? Emotionally manipulating the victim to self-blame is a common one noted by Lisak. Or hey, maybe he convinces her he thought she wanted it (was confused about consent), or maybe he even guilts her into not reporting by claiming to be a regular guy who just made a single terrible error in judgement but he can learn from it and become a better person?

I would find it absolutely ironic if the myth these posters are perpetuating–that lots of guys just don’t realize what they’re doing is hurting someone and a crime–came from accounts victims made to rape counsellors after being lied to by their rapists. The rapist lies to his victim, and then the victim repeats the lie as if it’s true, and then all of a sudden we have people thinking rapists rape women because they just don’t know any better, but with enough education they can figure it out.

And then you have a feedback loop, where these posters essentially confirm to a woman that the narcissistic, sociopathic, piece of shit who raped her really *might* be what he says–just a regular guy who made one mistake, and not a guy who’s probably done it before and will again–because hey, these posters imply that this kind of thing happens all the time.

That’s the “positive message” sent by these posters: that the small percentage of men who rape over and over and are responsible for almost all campus rapes, is actually a large population of regular guys who make one mistake and are capable of learning from it, or capable of being educated into not making that mistake in the first place.

These posters do nothing to tell women what actual rapists are like, do nothing to inform them of the cluster of behavioral and personality traits associated with the recidivist responsible for nearly all campus rapes–narcissism, entitlement, superficial charm, and general aggression and violence. These posters, in fact, imply to women that the man who raped them might not be the repeat offender responsible for 90% of rapes, that maybe he hasn’t done it before and maybe he won’t do it again.

And that’s a dangerous message in a culture where, according to many, only 10% of rape victims report their rapes. Because honestly, if I’d been raped, and my rapist had convinced me that it was all just a big misunderstanding, and that he could learn from it and wouldn’t do it again, and I had heard tons of public rhetoric implying, “well, yeah, that kind of thing happens all the time,” I might not be willing to put myself through the “gruelling process” of reporting just for my own sake, or to destroy a regular guy’s life over one error.

But if I knew that 90% of the time, he’s done it before and will do it again to someone else, you can be damn sure I’d be thinking about all his past and future victims, and schlepping myself down to the police station to report.

As for the stated target of these posters–the rapists themselves–well, that 4% of men responsible for 90% of rapes, who are recidivist predators and perpetrate a hugely disproportionate percentage of all other violence? Does anyone think a poster campaign like this is going to change their behavior?

Hell, Elton Yarborough, a student at Texas A&M who was linked to five rapes before he was finally put in prison, still insists he never broke the law, despite describing in detail the very acts that got him convicted of rape. One of the most disturbing things about this case is that he allegedly did it again to another woman after he was charged with rape.

If a criminal conviction isn’t enough to convince a rapist that having sex with a woman while she’s drunk and unconscious, something he did four times to four different women, and allegedly a fifth time after he’d been charged with rape–if a rape conviction isn’t enough to convince him what he did was a crime, what good does anyone think posters telling rapists it’s a crime are gonna do?

The “don’t be that guy” campaign does nothing to prevent rape. All it does is perpetuate a potentially dangerous myth about rapists, and point an accusing finger at the 94% of men–the only men this message will have any effect on–who don’t rape women.

You want to decrease rape? Get the recidivist rapists out of the population. Best way to do that with a poster campaign? Target it at women, and educate THEM. The message should be, “He’s probably lying to you. 90% of rapes are committed by a man who’s done it before and will do it again. Speak up.”

“Don’t be that guy” needs to go, because 94% of guys aren’t that guy, and the few who are that guy are sociopathic pieces of shit who don’t give a fuck about hurting others, and who like being that way.

The effect campaigns like this have on public sentiment about men, and men’s feelings about themselves is that rape is just something men do, rather than something sociopaths do. That’s just one of the many lies feminists tell to convince everyone men are the problem. And those lies sure seem to convince a lot of people, including a lot of men, that what’s wrong with society has a male face.

I have no doubt these dishonest posters will stay up, no matter how bigoted and potentially harmful they are. Because, what’s one more campaign pinning yet another human evil on masculinity, even if it might be inadvertently harming women as well as men? It’s just a drop in the bucket.

Links:

http://www.ctvnews.ca/video?playlistId=1.1361457

http://globalnews.ca/news/711198/mens-rights-group-defends-posters-claiming-women-lie-about-rape/

http://www.cbc.ca/player/News/Canada/Edmonton/ID/2396322522/

About Karen Straughan (aka GirlWritesWhat)

AVfM Contributing Editor Karen Straughan "Girl Writes What" is a 42 year old, divorced mother of three who enjoys talking about herself in the third person. As "Girl Writes What" Karen is co-host and star of AVfM Radio, and possibly the most popular and visible MHRA in North America. Her writing and videography on gender issues features in classrooms in high schools and universities on three continents. But she still has time for the little people, like Paul, and those other guys.

Main Website
View All Posts
  • eddy.dogleg

    You want to decrease rape? Get the recidivist rapists out of the population. Best way to do that with a poster campaign? Target it at women, and educate THEM. The message should be, “He’s probably lying to you. 90% of rapes are committed by a man who’s done it before and will do it again. Speak up.”

    Here’s thought if some one will create the “Speak up” poster I’ll hit the streets and put it up.

    It would be an interesting experiment to see how many would stay up for how long. My experience with putting up AVFM posters here in Saskatoon was that in a 24 hour period 1/2 of the posters would be torn down. On Broadway Avenue I had to replace 90% of the AVFM poster very 12 hours.

    Does any one know, or have a link, to what the criminologists or forensic psychologists have to say on preventing sexual assault.

  • Aimee McGee

    Thanks for the transcript, much easier for me than a video.
    I would love to see a proper education campaign like the one you describe and a matching one about spotting the narcissistic, entitled women in society too

  • TexasIsPangea Greg

    Anecdotes are funny. You can talk about an example of a man being falsely accused, but you may also need to consider a woman telling the truth that she had indeed been raped and wasn’t believed. So the man that raped her went free. I do however think that the examination of a victim or non-victim needs to be done, and your argument against the notion that examining the victim makes a ton of sense.

    It might also be important to point out that even if the girl is not believed through prosecution and the rapist gets away with it, she isn’t punished at all in terms of going to jail or anything like that. And not believing in that person doesn’t mean that you think that she is lying, but you just can’t find her story necessarily true, in which a man could be jailed for on false pretenses.

    Sometimes I think about which situation is actually worse, being raped and not being believed or being falsely accused of rape and going to jail. What would a man that has experienced telling the truth of being raped and then not believed and later is falsely accused of rape say when comparing both? There may be a general consensus which says his situation of being falsely accused is worse. As a variable in how he might take it, he may think that the rape, even if it is a violation, just doesn’t traumatize him just like how probably most men would feel. Being in jail because of being falsely accused however has a serious result of jail time. He also can reflect on how he had been wrongly convicted. I understand that a similar feeling may be instigated by not being believed when he is telling the truth about being raped, but going to jail may add insult to injury. Who knows, maybe not being believed has this effect where he constantly reflects on it, and it could be considered like being in “jail”. I know that results for a woman going through both scenarios may vary, and may argue the other way around as compared to the hypothetical man case.

    Anyways, I also think about rape when relating to the individual level and the notion that rape is so bad across the board for all victims on a level where things are at the utmost worst. People outside of rape usually make the assumption that a person is permanently scarred when raped, and it pervades the very notion of rape. Saying that a person is scarred is questionable in how you mean it. By association of being violated sexually, a woman may not want to have sex again and this could be termed as being a scar in her mind, along with the association of the violation throughout her whole life in a very personal manner. Or a woman may be violated sexually and not be possessed like the other one in severity. She can still talk about being violated when the need to talk about it comes up, even if 30 years from that incident. A woman can also be violated by her partner and just think about it in terms of something reprehensible happening to her, but isn’t quite as “bad” as it seems because there would be a personal association of personally knowing the guy and thinking of it as a temporary incident. Most rapes, which I have termed as sexual violations, come from a loved one, so this scenario is probably very common. You may have to also look at the ones who take it more personal than previously stated while still being raped by her partner.

    But anyways, when I imagine the connotation of rape, it stirs up the depiction of someone being scarred for life in a way that possesses the person for a lifetime. But the funny thing is, the characterization of this “possession” has lapses of not being as powerful when other thoughts naturally distract a person.

    • ragingfeminist

      Could you please direct me to the body of literature that supports your speculations about the psychological impacts of rape? Until you do, they are empty speculations that fruitlessly contradict years of valid, scientific research (google it).

  • 86

    Terrific essay – Thank you for writing this and posting it.

    In various forum postings around the tubes, I’ve been pointing out the Lisak conclusions, in part because Marcotte et. al., have been seeing drawing on Lisak and pointing out that it’s only 6% of men responsible for the overwhelming majority of rapes.

    So I point out there is a cake and eat it problem when they insist on profiling all men. (Schrodinger’s rapist).

    But precisely because Marcotte et. al., trot it out: (here for one: http://www.thefrisky.com/2012-07-27/the-soapbox-rapists-know-the-answer-is-no/#more-2417712)

    (And cotwa wrote about that here: http://www.cotwa.info/2012/09/part-iii-university-of-montanas.html)

    It might be interesting on twitter or wherever to ask Marcotte what she thinks about Don’t be that guy when considered along with Lisak. For the lulz, because of course she hate’s being pinned down and her mental squirming can be so much fun.

  • gateman

    Guys, comments needed on this sexist article out today :

    http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/law-order/victorias-most-powerful-men-declare-war-on-family-violence/story-fni0fee2-1226682821588

    “Dr Napthine called on all men to step up, saying police and the courts alone could not end family violence against women.”

  • HankRazor

    https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=sexual+assault+against+men&oq=sexual+assault+against+men

    All the top stories are of men sexually assaulting women. Just so’s you know. But I suppose that’s the pervasive influence of ‘dem crazy radfemz’.

    If 1-2% of rape allegations are fabricated, doesn’t that leave 98-99% that are real? And a whole bunch will be disbelieved by the police, or just thrown out at some later stage of proceedings? Your report doesn’t mention how many cases of rape result in successful convictions.

    However, this; “Target it at women, and educate THEM. The message should be, “He’s probably lying to you. 90% of rapes are committed by a man who’s done it before and will do it again. Speak up.” is good.
    But it still leaves the 10% that aren’t committed by serial rapists…that 10% rather overshadows the 2% of fabricated rapes AND the fact that only approximately 10% of rapes are reported.

    There should be more posters. “Don’t be that guy” is a weak slogan, you are entirely correct. Perhaps “have you overheard this guy in the pub? Speak out.” would work. It’s a well-known fact that sexual violence is a boast-factor for some men who perpetrate it, and who would they boast to? Other men. Don’t land all the responsibility on women – stay safe and don’t drink, keep your keys in your hands when outside after dark, always carry pepper spray etc.
    Abso-fucking-lutely women should be cautious, as much to avoid making utter fools of themselves while out as to avoid rape, but men shouldn’t close ranks and get defensive when the topic comes up. It takes two people – one rapist, one ‘rapee’ (because ‘victim’ will be leapt upon, no doubt) and statistics show that MEN RAPE MORE THAN WOMEN.
    Men should communicate with women better on this subject rather than both sexes sequestering themselves on opposite sides of the Internet and bitching each other out.

    • http://www.youtube.com/girlwriteswhat Karen Straughan (aka GirlWritesWhat)

      “If 1-2% of rape allegations are fabricated, doesn’t that leave 98-99% that are real?”

      The Edmonton Police Service claims that only 1-2% are false. However, because there is no mandate to pursue or prosecute false claims (even when they’re obvious and provable), this number isn’t based on investigation of a claim’s potential falsity, but lack of investigation. What they are saying is that in 1-2% of cases, there was incontrovertible alibi evidence that fell in their laps while they were investigating the claim as if it were genuine.

      There are a LOT of complaints that are dropped due to lack of evidence. EPS would not waste time and resources investigating those complaints in the other direction to determine if they were false, because they aren’t going to do anything about it even if they are false.

      Lisak did a fairly sound study that put the rate claims in this demographic that are determined false to a criminal court standard of certainty, at 5.9%. This is not only 3 times the typical rate of false reporting for non-sex crimes, it is the *minimum* estimate. These are the cases we *know* and can *prove* are false. And that number very closely resembles the percentage of complaints that are proven genuine through successful prosecution.

      There is no way to know exactly what percentage of complaints are genuine OR false, only the percentage we could prove genuine OR false–the other 88% of complaints are unprovable either way. The best we can do in those cases is to look to empirical research that determines what percentage of cases are *probably* false. That research tends to put the numbers in the double digits.

      “But it still leaves the 10% that aren’t committed by serial rapists…that 10% rather overshadows the 2% of fabricated rapes AND the fact that only approximately 10% of rapes are reported.”

      This is not necessarily the case. The ages in Lisak’s survey pool ranged from 18 to (a single) 71, with the median being about 26. I’d have to dig deeper, but it’s altogether possible that some, many or even all of the one-time offenders were on the young end of the spectrum. If that’s the case, some (or even all) of the one-timers may be serial rapists at the beginning of their “careers”.

      “It takes two people – one rapist, one ‘rapee’ (because ‘victim’ will be leapt upon, no doubt) and statistics show that MEN RAPE MORE THAN WOMEN.”

      Again, not necessarily the case. Depends entirely on which statistics you use, how “rape” is defined in those statistics (many, such as the CDC, define a woman forcing a man into sex as something other than “rape”), whether you are going by self-reports of victimization or self-reports of aggression (such as Lisak’s study), and even how you define “more”.

      There are a number of self-report studies that find that sexually aggressive behaviors (such as using physical force, weapons, taking advantage of an incapacitated person) are more common in *women*, not men.

      That is, though the CDC places the self-reported victimization rates of forced sex as identical for men and women (with women being the perpetrators in 80% of cases with male victims), sexual aggression as self-reported by women describing their own behavior show more women have engaged in this behavior than Lisak’s study demonstrated for men.

      From this, we can draw a few nuggets to think about:

      1) women may be more likely to rape, but are more likely to do it once or twice rather than pathologically

      2) if you have a random man and woman in front of you, the woman may be more likely to have committed rape than the man

      3) if this is the case, seuxal aggression in men most often presents as a pathology (a pattern of obsessive repetition of anti-social behaviors that manifest in men with specific personality traits which are associated with the Dark Triad), while in women it presents more as a normalized behavior, which would indicate it is women, not men, who rape because they “just don’t know any better”

      4) if THAT is the case, then feminist thoughts on Rape Culture are a projection of female psychology and women’s more normalized and socially endorsed sexual aggression, onto men

    • http://www.deanesmay.com Dean Esmay

      In a culture filled with rape hysteria and which routinely REFUSES to see women as capable of being predators in all but the most rare cases (like some sort of exotic specimen rather than, you know, a typical human), your Google search is fatuously stupid and evidence of nothing at all.

      You want to look at real stats, and what’s available doesn’t make the establishment position on this look good at all.

      You’re talking about cultural bias and prejudice here, and that’s all your Google search is showing.

    • Theseus

      It’s not that you didn’t make SOME good points, however there is a disconnect on your overall stance and some of your statements.

      One thing that you will discover here if you read the articles and comments, is that a frequent observation/complaint is hypocrisy, hypocrisy, and more hypocrisy.

      “MEN shouldn’t close ranks and get defensive when the topic comes up”.

      OK, think about this in an analogous consistent way; really think about it. Plus, after the above statement, you lay on a “statistically…”

      Really…THINK about what you just did.

      Do you really want me to go into all the classes and groups of people that “statistically” commit behavior/crime X more than another group (sometimes at a significantly higher level than other groups)? I guarantee you that if I used these as justifications to set up a similar poster campaign to target these groups for said behavior, you would say it was offensive,”othering”, and perhaps racist…and you would be right! I highly doubt you would admonish group X about “not closing ranks and getting defensive”. And if you attempt to say that it is different, then in what way is it different? How on this earth from a rational and logical standpoint, could it possibly be different?

      As I said…think about it.

  • Jay

    I wonder if there are any more statistics on the number of men (percentage of population) who actually commit rape. It can be a tricky number. For instance in Sweden, because the feminist hegemony is in charge over there, rape has been redefined to effectively mean regretful sex. And research clearly indicates, women, feel regretful after sex massively more than men.

    Please read a book about this topic by Oscar Swartz
    http://www.amazon.com/Brief-History-Swedish-Sex-ebook/dp/B0087AZNCK

    • scatmaster

      And research clearly indicates, women, feel regretful after sex massively more than men.

      Interesting comment. I felt numerous times in my life that after been satiated I was regretful and just wanted to get out of there. I did not feel like I was raped however. Maybe I was. What is the statute of limitations?

      • Theseus

        Yeah scats, especially after a coyote date (y’know where after a massive drinking binge…you wake up, look at the individual next to you, and you would rather gnaw your arm off rather than disturb her). I’ve had a few of those in my day; as I’m sure countless other men and women have had. Incredible regret afterwards (no joke), but I never felt like filing rape charges…I just wanted to forget about it and move on.

  • TexasIsPangea Greg

    I might also want to consider the fact that even if men might take being raped different in comparison to how a woman might take it, how a person feels individually about being raped is always justified. I mean you can’t really tell a person to take being raped less seriously just because some guy takes it differently.

    It has also occurred to me that a person who is raped and sees someone take it differently, will feel unjustified in feeling the exact extent of the pain, even when reasoning that she has the right to feel however she feels about her assault. Relativity is so fucking screwy.

  • HQR3

    The Gospel According to Dr. Lisak is that 6% of college men are rapists. Let’s see, you walk into a room with 50 college men, and 3 of them are rapists! Who woulda thunk?

    IMO, his “study” is a much, much higher grade of Mary Koss’ and will be far harder to deconstruct. But unravel it we must. By stipulating it unchallenged, we win the battle of the “Don’t Be That Guy” campaign, yet lose the war on the “rape culture” bullshit. We can never accede to femstats to win a skirmish.

    Until someone—preferably someone with a computer—can parse his raw data, evaluate his assumptions, and sample the interviews, I’ll never accept his 6% figure as anything other than nonsense.

  • Astrokid

    Re: the MRE posters.. it was brought up by The YOung Turks recently, alongside the Dubai “Rape” case.
    Woman Jailed in Dubai for Being Raped

    Re: dubai case, the MSM would not reveal the details unfavourable to their narrative.

    Interestingly, there’s a comment from a woman claiming to be from Dubai trashing the TYT
    Dubai Woman’s comment about general state of affairs”

  • ragingfeminist

    This is article is absurd.
    1. Your statistics are all based on reported rapes, which, according to almost every study on the matter, are drastically under-representative of the actual numbers. Even this famous infographic (http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2013/01/07/the-saddest-graph-youll-see-today/) significantly underestimates the number of unreported rapes. And that brings me to my next point:
    2. No matter what kind of skewed data you think you can find on false rape accusations, those numbers will–so long as people like you are able to express these opinions publicly–be undeniably dwarfed by the number of unreported rapes.
    3. You completely disregard underlying social causes of rape. Men in different societies the world over are encouraged to adopt the aggressive, violent behavior that often results in rape, abuse, and even femicide. http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1997-36850-000 I find it ironic that a website concerned with the wellbeing of men doesn’t address such a system that would compel them to do such horrific things. I’m not trying to absolve the individuals of their unforgivable crimes; rather, I condemn our culture’s tendency to associate violence and dominance with masculinity and its conflation of sex with power.

    • J Galt

      @rapingfeminist

      considering that false rape accusations aren’t recorded to begin with rape is a non-sequitur to the issue.

      I’ll go slow here for ya!

      if you don’t use your fingers to count with it doesn’t mean you don’t have fingers.

      if you don’t think men count it doesn’t mean men don’t exist.

      while reported rape will always be dwarfed by unreported rape, it does not mean that false rape accusations will be dwarfed by anything other than unreported false rape accusations.

      cue pedestal, trumpeted moral indignation, narcissistic genital conflation and ideological steroids..

      next!!!

    • malcolm

      Lol, you’re going to point to a chart made by the Enliven Project as some sort of proof?

      http://theenlivenproject.com/the-truth-about-false-accusation/

      You can read about their unscientific methodology and their apology for it right on the same page that they published it, and their promise to do a better job in the future. They admit that they have no idea how many rapes go unreported (and how could they?).

      I find it interesting that they assume every reported rape was indeed a rape, even after the “rapist” has been found not guilty in court. To come to the same conclusion as you do, one would have to presume guilt instead of innocence in every single case. Somebody who has been cleared of the charge of rape is still considered a rapist according to that chart. Do you believe that’s an honest way of presenting information?

      I prefer the presumption of innocence in criminal matters, so when I look at that chart through a different lens, it’s clearly telling me that only 6% of rape cases win a conviction, so therefore 94% must be false accusations, right? Right?

      Exact same numbers, just a different way of interpreting them, I just use the presumption of innocence instead of guilt (which I believe Americans are still entitled to in legal matters – despite feminist teeth grinding).

      I will not, however, leave you with the thought that I believe that 94% of rape accusations are false, I’m not a feminist, so I believe in honesty and strive for logical and balanced solutions using real data before it’s filtered through an ideological lens.

      Perhaps you shouldn’t worry so much about what men discuss on their own websites.

  • http://trololololololololololo.com/ derpatron5000

    Can “men’s rights” advocates get dates? How does that go?

    “uhm, I think the great injustice involving rape is the false accusations levied against men”

    dafuq?