Utah rape stats

[_Moniker]

Actually Charity, if a woman is incapacitated and someone had sex with her that is rape. That is NOT a false rape charge. I was clearly illustrating times when consent was not available to women. I never spoke of women that at first gave consent and later retracted consent. YOU were the one to do that! YOU were the one to first bring up false rape charges with this quote (my "story time" started after yours):

Oops. I have to make a small caveat on that. I had a student in one of my human sexuality classes come in to talk to me in my office after the topic of rape was discussed in class. She said, "I think maybe I was raped once. There was this guy and we were just kind of fooling around. I thought he really liked me, but he had another girl friend. If I had known he had a girl friend, I never would have done that. So I think I was raped."

You then go on to insinuate something about women that have multiple sex partners -- are you saying they are raped? I say they are not and yet I am wondering since you label them mentally ill you believe these young woman are raped? How very, very confusing!

Charity, none of my scenarios are in anyway false rape charges. You are the one that brings that in. Please quote me ONCE where I mention a false rape charge, unless of course you consider women that are not able to give consent as people that were not really raped.

Moniker, it might help you if you read one paragraph at a time. You are really confused about what I said.

Please settle down and listen. If a woman is intoxicated to the point of unconsciousness, then she falls into the medically compromised category. No consent is possible. If she is drunk, but conscious, she is still capable of making a decision. If a person gets drunk and drives, they aren't let off the hook because they couldn't make a good decision not to drive. As long as a woman is conscious, if she aquieses to sex, that isn't rape. Got it?

Then another idea: Since you believe that mentally challenged people cannot give consent, and are therefore raped, how is that different from a neurotic woman who has multiple sex partners? Can a really neurotic person give consent? And I answered you specifically that it wasn't the fact of having muiltiple sex partners, but the reason WHY.

Charity, I also said that if the woman did NOT consent she was raped. I never said that if she did consent that she was still raped. Never. I said this, and I've bolded the consent part:

What do you mean by that? I have no idea what you are attempting to say. If a woman is unsure if she was raped (she was intoxicated --as is indicated in the stats for some cases) and yet did not give consent she was still raped. It matters not what she defines it as. Of course if she is traumatized by the experience it matters what she thinks as for her healing process and ability to cope with the assault. Yet, no matter how she is traumatized by the experience, or thinks of the experience, it does not change the fact that if she was sexually assaulted without consent she was raped -- it's that simple.

This was in direct reply to you talking about how women, themselves, define rape. Do you get that I ALWAYS recognized that consent was the determining factor as well as understanding that a woman does not define the rape herself as to whether or not she was raped. It was YOU that said a woman is not raped if she doesn't consider herself raped. GET IT?

Charity, plenty of people are neurotic and last time I checked that encompasses a wide range of personality disorders that include depression -- it does not effect rational thought, as far as I was aware (and I just googled it and confirmed my initial thoughts on that). So, yes, a neurotic person can give consent for sex.

I would still like to see a study that says that women that are abandoned by their fathers that then go on to have multiple sex partners are doing so because of neurosis -- and how this is rape. Thanks.

[_Moniker]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/articles/n/neurosis.htm


Neurosis

In modern psychology, the term neurosis, also known as psychoneurosis or neurotic disorder, is a general term that refers to any mental imbalance that causes distress, but does not interfere with rational thought (i.e., psychosis) or an individual's ability to function in daily life (i.e., psychosis or a personality disorder)..

I loathe to consider what motives you have to label young women that search for male partners as being neurotic. I sense that it may have more to do with your issues, than the young womans. Seriously Charity, was that just a swipe? It didn't sting anyone, I hope. Only, perhaps, showed the very skewed way in which you view sexuality and what you think of women that have various partners.

[_charity]

This was in direct reply to you talking about how women, themselves, define rape. Do you get that I ALWAYS recognized that consent was the determining factor as well as understanding that a woman does not define the rape herself as to whether or not she was raped. It was YOU that said a woman is not raped if she doesn't consider herself raped. GET IT?

Charity, plenty of people are neurotic and last time I checked that encompasses a wide range of personality disorders that include depression -- it does not effect rational thought, as far as I was aware (and I just googled it and confirmed my initial thoughts on that). So, yes, a neurotic person can give consent for sex.

I would still like to see a study that says that women that are abandoned by their fathers that then go on to have multiple sex partners are doing so because of neurosis -- and how this is rape. Thanks.

You can look up Krohn, Zoe Brogan, Dalby, all have written on this phenoemnon. The definition of abnormal behavior includes one description: any behavior which does not meet the goal of the behavior. So a young woman who wants love and affection, and goes from one sexual partner to the other lookin for love and affection, but only getting sex is behaving abnormally. We know that people who are mentally ill can't really give consent. At some point, a promiscuous woman who is unhappy and not having her essential emotional needs met by her fractured relationships, has to be considered ill. At what point does her mental illness prevent her from giving ocnsent.

[_asbestosman]

The definition of abnormal behavior includes one description: any behavior which does not meet the goal of the behavior.

I'm not sure I like that definition. What counts as the goal? In bulimea, one gorges on food because it tastes good and then gets rid of it so as not to pack on the pounds. I suppose the goal is reached, but it is severely damaging to a person. Is it therefore merely categorized as destructive behavior instead of abnormal?

What of germophobes who constantly wash their hands and disinfect doorknobs?

[Guest]

This was in direct reply to you talking about how women, themselves, define rape. Do you get that I ALWAYS recognized that consent was the determining factor as well as understanding that a woman does not define the rape herself as to whether or not she was raped. It was YOU that said a woman is not raped if she doesn't consider herself raped. GET IT?

Charity, plenty of people are neurotic and last time I checked that encompasses a wide range of personality disorders that include depression -- it does not effect rational thought, as far as I was aware (and I just googled it and confirmed my initial thoughts on that). So, yes, a neurotic person can give consent for sex.

I would still like to see a study that says that women that are abandoned by their fathers that then go on to have multiple sex partners are doing so because of neurosis -- and how this is rape. Thanks.

You can look up Krohn, Zoe Brogan, Dalby, all have written on this phenoemnon. The definition of abnormal behavior includes one description: any behavior which does not meet the goal of the behavior. So a young woman who wants love and affection, and goes from one sexual partner to the other lookin for love and affection, but only getting sex is behaving abnormally. We know that people who are mentally ill can't really give consent. At some point, a promiscuous woman who is unhappy and not having her essential emotional needs met by her fractured relationships, has to be considered ill. At what point does her mental illness prevent her from giving ocnsent.

I tried to find information related to the above mentioned people and was not able to find much at all. From Brogan I wasn't able to find anything. Dalby was cited in an abstract by someone else briefly--and it was about teenagers and not women. Charity, it is not in doubt that this behavior can be self-destructive. For a young woman that is searching for intimacy and love via promiscuity this is indeed not healthy, nor is it really outside the norm for many that suffer from low self-esteem. You are comfortable with saying that women that seek one thing, find another, are then raped even though they desired the intercourse? I find that shocking.

Would you prosecute a man for having intercourse with a promiscuous woman that was searching for love and received instead a one night stand? Was he a rapist? That's what you are suggesting, I suppose -- even though that just seems absurd.

You, at first said they were neurotic and could not consent -- I posted material (I searched more and every website I found agreed with what I posted) that neurotic behavior does not indicate that a person is no longer capable of rational behavior. If a woman desires sex then she consents to it.

I, at times, just don't even know what the point is you're trying to make Charity? No doubt, there is sexual behavior that is harmful, destructive, and ill advised. The subject (that you're trying to divert from) is rape.

At some point, a promiscuous woman who is unhappy and not having her essential emotional needs met by her fractured relationships, has to be considered ill.

What mental illness would you diagnosis this young woman with? Depression, is one possibility. If one is depressed does this mean she's raped when a man has intercourse with her when she invites it?

I would suppose, following your logic here, that most plural wives that were depressed were then raped by their husbands if they received no affection and only sexual intercourse from their husbands infrequently. Or perhaps, any woman that gave into a man that wanted intercourse and then was threatened with eternal damnation for herself and her family if not consenting to the intercourse -- I imagine that may be another case of emotional distress. Or, perhaps all the women in the LDS Church that are on prozac that still have sex with their husbands? They're depressed (since they're being medicated for it) and I suppose they're raped too since by your premise they aren't capable of giving consent. That's just a really novel way to look at it Charity. Indeed.

[_beastie]

Your ethnocentric attitude colors your view on this.

This is just a diversionary attempt on your part.

We are discussing one particular type of behavior occuring in Utah. If we're going to use data obtained from other places in that discussion, of course we have to be talking about the exact same behavior. We have to be able to cross cultural boundaries in order to be specific in talking about one particular type of behavior. If we are not specific and make sure we're talking about the same behavior. This isn't ethnocentrism. This is specificity. If the culture in question - Utah - calls any unwanted, forced sexual intercourse 'rape', if we want to find out how much the same behavior occurs in other settings, we must use the same definition of the behavior.

And who gets to set the "standard" definition? Again, please examine your ethnocentrism.

Well, gee. We're talking about rape in Utah. Here's a crazy idea. What say we use the definition of the term commonly understood in, say, UTAH??? And when we're trying to obtain data from other areas of the world for comparitive purposes, what say we use that same definition? I know, it's crazy, it's crazy.

No, I said all studies worth their salt control for under-reporting. You were making a counter claim.

WTF??? I swear you just make stuff up.

I didn't make a "counter claim" that all studies worth their salt DON'T control for under- reporting. I asked you to share the information upon which you claimed your conclusions were based, and I wanted to know SPECIFICALLY how they controlled for this factor, particularly in oppressive societies which don't allow their women to speak to strangers.

In extremely patriarchal societies, men protect their "possessions" jealously. Let's use your car metaphor. These men would keep their cars in locked garages, or if out on the street have policemen to protect them. Occasionally a man will be careless with his "possession" and his car will be keyed. But not that often.

Once again, it would be lovely if you actually supported these assertions with the studies you keep referring to.

[_beastie]

You can't use possession as a rape issue. This is what drives me batty about this extreme feminist argument. All things are rape. Burglary. Reading your diary. This demeans women who have been brutally raped. No, it isn't rape.

Lovely. Next time I see someone using that argument, I'll point them in your direction.

In the meantime, I consider this response an attempt to divert attention from my point, which is clear. Men in extreme patriarchal societies view women as possessions, and other men may violate women in order to violate the possession of the male. You can pretend this isn't so as much as you want, but the history of the world has made this abundantly clear.

Have you read the George Mason link? You didn't respond to it. Probably because it did not support your argument. Oh, well.

yes, I responded to it. Another one of my posts you ignore - or decide is a "throw away" line. The George Mason link clearly stated that the data was specific to women who had "attempted to report a rape". I told you this back on the first post on page 7 of this thread. I said:

by the way, your George Mason brochure survey states:

Quote:
The following table represents the percent of women polled in a survey who replied
they attempted to report they were forced into sex, broken down country.

I'll come back to the rest later.

[_charity]

The definition of abnormal behavior includes one description: any behavior which does not meet the goal of the behavior.

I'm not sure I like that definition. What counts as the goal? In bulimea, one gorges on food because it tastes good and then gets rid of it so as not to pack on the pounds. I suppose the goal is reached, but it is severely damaging to a person. Is it therefore merely categorized as destructive behavior instead of abnormal?

What of germophobes who constantly wash their hands and disinfect doorknobs?

There are 4 different ways to look at behavior to determine if it is normal or abnormal. And each has its own problems.

1. Anything that is away from the norm -- thus ABnormal. But obviously many behaviors which are not what everybody does aren't going to cause any problems. In some instances, the ABnormal has real benefits to the individual or to the society.

2. Any behavior which is destructive to the individual or to others.

3. Any behavior which is maladaptive--(this is the one I was referring to) where the behavior does not lead to the goal for which the behavior is performed.

4. Any behavior which is distressing to the individual, and which is not controllable.

[_charity]

I, at times, just don't even know what the point is you're trying to make Charity? No doubt, there is sexual behavior that is harmful, destructive, and ill advised. The subject (that you're trying to divert from) is rape.

Moniker, this whole discussion we have been having is about consent. I am trying to nail you down on what you consider consent. You haven't told me yet. A woman who is drunk doesn't give consent. But a woman who is neurotic and looking for love and intimacy who is only sexually used by men taking advantage of that need, is not. I am trying to get a consistent applicaiton of your idea of consent.

I am getting tired of trying. One more time. Give me a good defintion of consent, that you are consistently going to apply. Otherwise, I am done with the "consent" issue. Your foray off into depression and plural marriage is really biazrre.

[_charity]

We are discussing one particular type of behavior occuring in Utah.

Oh, good. Now show me the data base on this "culture." Show me the studies that have been done to determine what type of culture this is. What is the degree of homogeneity? What are the confounding variables? Show me the studies.

I asked you to share the information upon which you claimed your conclusions were based, and I wanted to know SPECIFICALLY how they controlled for this factor, particularly in oppressive societies which don't allow their women to speak to strangers.

I already told you once. Random sampling, anonymous, non face to face polling, where the person is asked the specific question, e.g. "Were you ever raped, but did not report it?" This gives an estimate of the number of cases unreported which can then be compared to the number reported. This isn't rocket science. Well, actually, is it social science.

Oppressive cultures allow females to speak with females unknown to them, when they don't allow males to speak to females.