Rape statistics debunked (with transcript)

Note: When possible, I obtain a transcript to good videos that have solid content that are well-served by a transcript. PwnySlaystation01 (pronounced “Pony Slaystation 01″ was kind enough to provide this transcript when I asked him for it. You can subscribe to his channel right here. But you might not want to, as one of those dreadful MRAs he might do something heinous like use logic and facts on you that might upset you in some way.–DE

This is the first part in a series I hope to make on the misrepresentation, misunderstanding, and outright lies spouted by feminists to justify laws, specifically targeting men, that would otherwise be viewed as unconstitutional, unfair and hateful.

I should not even have to say this, but if I don’t, I know I’ll be forced to deal with straw man arguments in the comments. I do not support rape. I am strongly against those who commit violence, whether in a sexual nature or not. I’ve provided links and citations for everything discussed in this video. In some cases, the info was found in google books, and the links are massive, so for those I’ve just named the google search terms and page numbers. Now let’s get on with it.

One of the most common figures cited by feminists in discussions about rape, is the number of females who will be victims of rape in their lifetime. At first, it was said that 1 in 4 females would be raped at some point in their lives. That figure fell to 1 in 5, and then 1 in 6. Depending on the feminist you talk to, you’ll typically hear one of these three figures. Either 1 in 4, 1 in 5, or 1 in 6 females will be raped at some point in their lives by a man. That really is an incredibly high number. We all know that anecdotal evidence isn’t really evidence, but when a so-called statistic shows such a different view of reality than the one the rest of us live every day, we can usually start assuming something is wrong with the statistic.

While many people have made cogent arguments against hateful articles such as Schrodinger’s Rapist, most people seem to grant the 1 in 4 or 1 in 6 number, either because they don’t really want to investigate themselves, or because even if the number was that high, the behaviour advocated in Schrodiner’s Rapist would still be irrational. I think if we grant this statistic to our opponents too often, it will become fact, even outside of radical feminist circles. I believe this is extremely damaging to society’s view of men, and will result in further legislation and rape shield laws which will result in even more unfair trials and make false rape allegations even more damaging.

First, let’s examine where these statistics came from. These figures seem to come exclusively from the 1985 Ms. magazine report by Mary Koss. Other cited works typically draw results from this original report. Mary Koss claims she was contacted out of the blue by Gloria Steinem, who wanted to do a national rape survey on college campuses. Gloria had apparently chosen Mary Koss to direct this survey. Koss and her team interviewed about three thousand females, all in college, who were randomly selected from universities across the United States.

These female students were all asked a series of ten questions, generally about sexual violation, followed by questions about the specific violation. Questions about whether there was alcohol involved, and how they felt both at the time, and after, the event. Koss counted anyone who answered affirmatively to the following three questions, as having been raped. The questions are:

“Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs?”

“Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn’t want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force (i.e.: twisting your arm, holding you down, etc) to make you?”

“Have you had sexual acts (anal or oral intercourse or penetration by objects other than the penis) when you didn’t want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force to make you?”

Out of the women questioned, Koss concluded that 27.5% of females had been victims of rape. This 27.5% was made up of 15.4% who had, by Koss’ standards, been raped, with another 12.1% who had been victims of attempted rape. This is where the 1 in 4, 1 in 5 or 1 in 6 statistic comes from.

There are some obvious flaws with this study, so let’s look at a few of them. Let me preface this section by saying that when I speak of “rape” here, I’m talking about Mary Koss’ definition of rape, as described in the questions above. First, when feminists use these statistics, those who were apparently victims of attempted rape, are also classified as rape victims. In other words, even if you weren’t raped, but, in Mary Koss’ definition, rape had been attempted. You are still a rape victim. If you were drinking, and consented to the sex, but then later regretted it, you were also a rape victim. This was regardless of whether the man was drinking as well. Here’s the kicker. Out of all the women who Koss cited as being raped, only 25% of those women agreed it was rape. Again, only one quarter of supposed rape victims agreed that they were raped. Such a problem does not bother Koss, and she continues to publish the article as-is.

Aside from the obvious problem of women being labeled as rape victims when they don’t agree they had been raped, probably the biggest problem with this study lies in the question about whether the woman was drinking alcohol at the time. If you have been drinking, consent to sex, and then later regret it, that is considered rape. It doesn’t matter if the male didn’t use force, persuasion, threats or anything else. If the woman was drinking, and she regretted it afterwards, it’s rape. In fact, twelve years after this survey was published, Blade magazine reporters who weren’t convinced by the survey, reached out to Koss for a statement. Koss told the Blade, which is a small independent award-winning newspaper in Ohio, that quote “At the time I viewed the question as legal; I now concede that it’s ambiguous”. Most honest people would assume that a quote like that would be followed with a concession that the entire study was faulty, but such a quote wasn’t forthcoming. Even though, by Koss’ own admission, once you remove the positive responses to the alcohol question, the number you’re left with is 1 in 9. That’s an error of significant magnitude. However, it’s still a high number.

Once you also take into account the fact that only a quarter of those determined to have been raped, by Koss’ estimation, agreed that it was, in fact, rape, it becomes even more dubious. People like Neil Gilbert, a professor at Berkeley’s School of Social Welfare asks if the confusion between a college student’s sex experience and whether or not it’s considered rape was an adequate representation of female undergraduates. Or even on society as a whole. Cathy Young, a journalist commenting on this issue observes that “Women have sex after initial reluctance for a number of reasons… fear of being beaten up by their dates is rarely reported as one of them”. Several others have argued that Koss clearly had no right to judge females who said they weren’t raped, as being rape victims.

Another interesting finding, found by Koss herself, is that 42% of those she counted as rape victims went on to have sex with their so-called attackers at a later date.

Based on the bad-science that was used in this oft-cited survey, we can safely disregard the entire study. Anyone who uses Koss’ study as evidence for any rape statistics should be soundly rebutted as having faulty evidence. Since this is by far the most cited piece of evidence for many laws, articles, and arguments by feminists, we can completely disregard these arguments and articles. The fact that studies like these influence law is despicable, and should be opposed at every opportunity. Until we start being objective, there is no way we will be able to address real rape, and real violence.

Thanks for watching. I hope to continue this series shortly.

Gilbert, “Examining the Facts,” pp. 120-32.

Cathy Young, Washington Post (National Weekly Edition), July 29, 1992, p. 25.

Blade, special report, p. 5.

Mary Koss, “Hidden Rape: Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Students in Higher Education,” in Ann Wolbert Burgess, ed.,Rape and Sexual Assault, vol. 2 (New York: Garland Publishing, 1988), p. 8.

Robin Warshaw, in her book I Never Called It Rape (New York: HarperPerennial, 1988), p. 2, published by the Ms. Foundation and with an afterword by Mary Koss. The book summarizes the findings of the rape study.

http://www.city-journal.org/2008/18_1_campus_rape.html

http://www.leaderu.com/real/ri9502/sommers.html