Utah rape stats

[_Moniker]

I'm anxious for Coggins to return to this thread and explain how the proliferation of pornography on the internet (could be argued that more people have access today to pornography than any time in the future through this medium) didn't correlate to a high rape rate in the last 10 years as opposed to those years prior.

Maybe all those rapists are staying home in front of their bright screens instead of prowling the streets? Praise be to the internet and easy peacy free porn! ;)

[_Runtu]

Don't hold your breath waiting for an anti-Mormon to say that anything good could come from Mormonism.

Oh, will you please shut up about how awful we anti-Mormons are? Go ahead and disagree, but stop telling us what we will and won't say and why.

Don't tell me you still like funeral potatos!

That's one of my guilty pleasures, actually. My kids love them.

Sorry for getting a little snippy, but I'm so tired of people making these blanket statements about how awful the opposition is.

[_Yoda]

I'm anxious for Coggins to return to this thread and explain how the proliferation of pornography on the internet (could be argued that more people have access today to pornography than any time in the future through this medium) didn't correlate to a high rape rate in the last 10 years as opposed to those years prior.

Maybe all those rapists are staying home in front of their bright screens instead of prowling the streets? Praise be to the internet and easy peacy free porn! ;)

The Internet is for Porn!

:)

Sorry...just have to post this song:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4pn4kZyq ... re=related

[_asbestosman]

This is tangential, but does it count as rape if the woman consents but would not have had she known about X?

Say she consented, but would not have had she known that the man was married or had a girlfriend. What if she wouldn't if she knew that the man was a republican / democrat / Christian / atheist / whatever? What if she consented but wouldn't had she known that the man was once a woman? What if she consented but wouldn't had she known that the man was 10 years older/younger than her? What if she wouldn't have consented had she known that the man had an STD? What if she wouldn't consent had she known that the man didn't really love her or wasn't really sorry for hurting her feelings or didn't really like her cooking? What if she wouldn't have consented if she had known that the man was actually bald or had been using hair coloring? What if she woldn't have consented if she had known that they would end up divorcing after some time?

Are most cases of rape clear, or are most cases ambiguous? I would think most are clear. That said, I've been raised to avoid shades of gray in these matters.

[_Moniker]

This is tangential, but does it count as rape if the woman consents but would not have had she known about X?

No. Consent to sexual relations means there could not have been a rape.

Say she consented, but would not have had she known that the man was married or had a girlfriend. What if she wouldn't if she knew that the man was a republican / democrat / Christian / atheist / whatever? What if she consented but wouldn't had she known that the man was once a woman? What if she consented but wouldn't had she known that the man was 10 years older/younger than her? What if she wouldn't have consented had she known that the man had an STD? What if she wouldn't consent had she known that the man didn't really love her or wasn't really sorry for hurting her feelings or didn't really like her cooking? What if she wouldn't have consented if she had known that the man was actually bald or had been using hair coloring? What if she woldn't have consented if she had known that they would end up divorcing after some time?

None of those are cases of rape. The above scenarios would suggest the woman has regrets after the occurrence. Yet, it doesn't alter the fact that she did already consent to the sexual relations.

Are most cases of rape clear, or are most cases ambiguous? I would think most are clear. That said, I've been raised to avoid shades of gray in these matters.

Stranger rapes are usually clear. Date rapes and marital rape are, at times, ambiguous. How do you avoid shades of gray in the matters? I think a good rule of thumb is to communicate verbally what each party desires as to avoid confusion. Unfortunately that too often is not what occurs.

[_beastie]

If I could just remember to not expect overall coherency or consistency in Charity’s postings, I would get less frustrated.

Beastie:

How women view their experiences is dependent upon their culture, and whether or not they view themselves as having the right to “own” their own bodies.

In regards to women “acquiescing” to sexual intercourse for a lot of reasons:

A. Woman acquiesces to have sex despite the fact that she doesn’t enjoy it to appease her husband.
B. Woman acquiesces to have sex with a stranger because if she protests and makes noise, people will find out about it. The man may end up punished, which would please her, but her punishment, as damaged goods, will be far worst, in addition to the possible punishment for doing something that “asked for it”, in her culture – you know, like leaving the house alone.

As I have already stated, these events are worlds apart, and to conflate the two in anyway is counter-productive. When you continually remind us that women have sex for many reasons, you are conflating the two. You can't really view A and B as equivalent, or do you?

charity:

Where you make the error here is by allowing for only two possiblities. There are many more. And why are you trying to make a "yes" or "no" question out of something much more complicated?

Of course there are many possibilities. I want to know if you appreciate the difference between the two scenarios I outlined. The difference is so stark that it is ridiculous, in the middle of a conversation about rape statistics, to talk about when acquiescing to sex for all sorts of reasons. This comment would not be out of place in a different sort of conversation, but when it occurs in the middle of a conversation about rape, then it is inappropriate and diversionary. I am simply trying to get you to stop being diversionary.

Beastie’s earlier comment:

Eighty years ago this would have been an accurate statement, but it is not any longer. While women lag behind men due to social habits, our legal system is no longer based on patriarchy.

Charity’s excuse:

I thought that was pretty much a throw away line. "While women lag behind" is a complete trivialization of the situation. A few bandaids on a system is not going to change the basic nature of the system.

You have a lot of nerve to accuse me of trivializing on this thread.

Moreover, your statements trivialize the changes that have taken place over the past century. Earning the right to vote? The right to own property, to have a chance to have custody of one’s children? You don’t even seem willing to recognize how foundational these changes are, and how these changes distinguish our society from other, extreme patriarchal societies.

Charity:

Why discussing something with me is maddening, is because I won't let you get away with NOT establishing the most basic obvious points. When you claim to have done so, and haven't, it is impossible to discuss anything rationally.

You have a different notion of what constitutes “rational”. To me, it is “rational” to discuss this issue with people who recognize, for example, that while the US certainly has more progress to make, extraordinary changes have taken place over the past century. You won’t even agree to that without pages of bickering, for heaven’s sake. That isn’t rational.

There may not be that kind of data gathered and kept. But when you don't have it, you have to stay out of the argument or else you are just throwing fists in the dark, hoping you will connect with something, anything. This is why I say you don't establish the most basic, obvious points. You just admitted it.

Gee, ya think such data is not gathered and kept in a systematic, reliable basis? Ya think??? YA THINK????

So, due to the lack of such data, we are forbidden even trying to figure out why a state such as Utah has such a high rape rate. I mean, really, isn’t it a bit counter-intuitive that a state that has lower than average crime rates in other areas, a state that is so influenced by a conservative religion that teaches about the sanctity of sex, ends up with a higher than average rape rate? Aren’t you the slightest bit curious about that?

The word "extreme" should be a clue. Extreme means "of a character or kind farthest removed from the ordinary or average." If you are going to place all religious behaviors on a continuum, you would have to agree that LDS beliefs are not anywhere near the extreme end. LDS don't fly planes into buildilngs. Extremist muslims do. LDS don't whip themselves with "disciplines" during prayer to cut their skin and bleed. Some Carmelites do. LDS don't refuse life saying medical procedures on religious grounds. Jehovah's Witnesses do. Capiche?

You do not see your faith as extreme because you believe in it. The people you just cited, with the possible exception of the terrorists, do not view themselves as “extreme” with the negative connotations you’re attaching to the word, by insisting that it is a completely different animal than “devout”.

Do you imagine, for example, that early Mormons who practiced polygamy and attempted to live in a communal setting were “extreme”, as you use the word? Or were they “devout”?

[_beastie]

Now, Ms. Sociologist, let me remind you of what you just asserted:

There may not be that kind of data gathered and kept. But when you don't have it, you have to stay out of the argument or else you are just throwing fists in the dark, hoping you will connect with something, anything. This is why I say you don't establish the most basic, obvious points. You just admitted it.

You are stating that you are differentiating between reported rape and whether or not the woman thinks she’s been raped. So I’m left wondering what information allowed you to make these assertions:

The ignorance over the causes and motivations for rape is pretty heavy over here. Suppositions about patriarchal societies and repressed sexuality among them.

Most rape is not about sex. So repressed sexuality doesn't even get into the picture. Rape is about power. Men in societies where they have the power don't generally rape. Most fordible rapists have sexual realtionships with wives or girl friends.

(Of course, if the society is extremely repressive, women will allow men to have sexual access without protesting, becaues protesting doesn't do any good anyway.) So in extremely patriarchal societies, there is very little forcible rape.

It is when men perceive themselves as being powerless that rape becomes epidemic. Rape is about getting revenge, on humiliating, not about sexual gratification.

The attempts to link rape stats with societal conditions as presented in earlier posts is completely erroneous.

Women in patriarchal societies underreport rape for many reasons, some of which have already been mentioned. Yet somehow, you know that in extremely patriarchal societies, there is very little forcible rape, and you know that when men perceive themselves as powerless rape becomes epidemic.

In patriarchal societies, men already have all the power. Why would they feel powerless? Of course, maybe you agree with my earlier example, that of the Mormon influenced male feeling shamed and out of control due to his inability to stop masturbating, and developing anger and resentment towards women whose bodies provoke such a reaction. But I doubt it. So why would they feel powerless?

And are you omniscient? Because, given how rape is underreported in patriarchal societies, you’d have to be omniscient to be able to obtain the data to which you must be privy to draw the conclusions you drew above. Otherwise, lacking omniscience, you must just be a hypocrite who is very happy to draw conclusions without adequate data herself while chastising others for doing so.

Other than that point, I refer you to moniker’s excellent reply to you:

Moniker:

Well that's interesting. Since we're doing story time I have one:

A mentally handicapped women that is sexually assulated by her caretaker, is she raped? A woman in a coma that ends up pregnant, was she raped? A senile elderly person that doesn't even recall, or have the ability to comprehend what happened, were they raped? Are children raped Charity when they don't even understand the concept, or may not even recognize that it shouldn't be occurring? Infants that are violated, are they raped? Just continue the thought to include every person that may not be capable of defining whether or not they were able to give consent or even if that was an option.

The act of intercourse WITH OUT consent is rape, Charity. It has nothing to do with whether the person themselves defines it. If sexual assault occurred when there was not consent THAT is rape.

[_asbestosman]

Stranger rapes are usually clear. Date rapes and marital rape are, at times, ambiguous. How do you avoid shades of gray in the matters? I think a good rule of thumb is to communicate verbally what each party desires as to avoid confusion. Unfortunately that too often is not what occurs.

1) I stick with marriage
2) We communicate verbally and clearly.
3) we stop when asked to stop.

[_charity]

Now, Ms. Sociologist,

Just to set the record straight. I am neither a psychologist or a sociologist. I taught psychology courses at a university and a community college.

let me remind you of what you just asserted:

There may not be that kind of data gathered and kept. But when you don't have it, you have to stay out of the argument or else you are just throwing fists in the dark, hoping you will connect with something, anything. This is why I say you don't establish the most basic, obvious points. You just admitted it.

You are stating that you are differentiating between reported rape and whether or not the woman thinks she’s been raped. So I’m left wondering what information allowed you to make these assertions:

No, I never stated that the data we were discussing was the report/not report data. I said if you are going to make assumptions and charges about a society you need to be able to make concrete statements. Utah, for isntance, while it may have 50+% LDS, there is still a very sizeable proportion of the population which is not. So let's get data about the society. I used the example of gun shot deaths. You can't make an asusmption that black men are being shot by white men, until you find out who is doing the shooting. In the case of this discussion, I specifically said you needed data on who the rape victimes were and who the rapists were. Not names, of course, but demographically.

In patriarchal societies, men already have all the power. Why would they feel powerless?

This shows that you don't understand patriarchal societies. There is a power heirarchy among men. Some men have lots more power than others do. There are many men who have almost no power at all.

Of course, maybe you agree with my earlier example, that of the Mormon influenced male feeling shamed and out of control due to his inability to stop masturbating, and developing anger and resentment towards women whose bodies provoke such a reaction. But I doubt it. So why would they feel powerless?

And the source of this assumption, since you have no training in psychology or sociology?

And are you omniscient? Because, given how rape is underreported in patriarchal societies, you’d have to be omniscient to be able to obtain the data to which you must be privy to draw the conclusions you drew above. Otherwise, lacking omniscience, you must just be a hypocrite who is very happy to draw conclusions without adequate data herself while chastising others for doing so.

Those who study psychology and sociology know that there are attempts to deal with underreporting. Random surveys will ask a quesiton, "Were you ever raped but did not report it?" Then results can be extrapolated. That is what I was working with here. I never said that any information I got I picked out of the ether.

Moniker's objection is ridiculous. Consent is always an issue. We were not talking about children or mentally or phsyically incapacitated females. We were talking about adult women. You and Moniker may assume that women in extremely patriarchal societies are incompetent. I don't demean them in that way.

The act of intercourse WITH OUT consent is rape, Charity. It has nothing to do with whether the person themselves defines it. If sexual assault occurred when there was not consent THAT is rape.

[/quote]

Of course, it has to do with what the woman thinks. She is the one giving or not giving consent! You can't decide for her.

[_beastie]

No, I never stated that the data we were discussing was the report/not report data. I said if you are going to make assumptions and charges about a society you need to be able to make concrete statements. Utah, for isntance, while it may have 50+% LDS, there is still a very sizeable proportion of the population which is not. So let's get data about the society. I used the example of gun shot deaths. You can't make an asusmption that black men are being shot by white men, until you find out who is doing the shooting. In the case of this discussion, I specifically said you needed data on who the rape victimes were and who the rapists were. Not names, of course, but demographically.

Well, then, go with Idaho, which is still largely LDS and also has an above average rape rate.

This shows that you don't understand patriarchal societies. There is a power heirarchy among men. Some men have lots more power than others do. There are many men who have almost no power at all.

Actually, I do. I wanted YOU to say it. And you did! BINGO.

Do you realize you just confirmed my speculation that patriarchy could be a factor in higher rape rates? Patriarchy DOES create feelings of powerlessness in some men. And, by your own admission, that is what drives some sick individuals to rape.

beastie:

Of course, maybe you agree with my earlier example, that of the Mormon influenced male feeling shamed and out of control due to his inability to stop masturbating, and developing anger and resentment towards women whose bodies provoke such a reaction. But I doubt it. So why would they feel powerless?

charity

And the source of this assumption, since you have no training in psychology or sociology?

You don't have to have formal training to have common sense. I know, from being LDS and reading the thoughts of many exLDS men on this issue, that young LDS men often feel deep shame due to their inability to stop masturbating. I know of one young man who attempted suicide due to the self loathing he developed over the issue. Of course, there were likely other issues involved, but this was one he reported. Likewise, a rapist is going to have other issues other than just the deep seated shame over sexual impulses, but that deep seated shame could easily become an impetus to strike out at the source of the shame.

Are you actually denying my scenario is possible?

Those who study psychology and sociology know that there are attempts to deal with underreporting. Random surveys will ask a quesiton, "Were you ever raped but did not report it?" Then results can be extrapolated. That is what I was working with here. I never said that any information I got I picked out of the ether.

I would like to see these studies that led you to claim that forcible rape is less frequent in extreme patriarchal societies. Thanks.

Moniker's objection is ridiculous. Consent is always an issue. We were not talking about children or mentally or phsyically incapacitated females. We were talking about adult women. You and Moniker may assume that women in extremely patriarchal societies are incompetent. I don't demean them in that way.

No. We are assuming, LIKE YOU DID AND EXPLICITLY STATED, that they know they have no other option.

Of course, it has to do with what the woman thinks. She is the one giving or not giving consent! You can't decide for her.

Calling it "consent" because she sees no other option is a grotesque distortion on the word. There are young women who put up with incest, and even "acquiesce" without argument, for that very reason - they have no other choice. This is "consent" in your world?

Disgusting.