andrewducker | Somewhere that was leading

Somewhere that was leading

There was much amusement this morning when I checked my email and discovered that some people thought that I was trying to do some kind of scientific research via an LJ poll, or thought that I was trying to make a point about how many people had been raped (which was clearly not data you could extract from the question I asked).

Um.

No.

This was all kicked off by the discussion a few days back about the feminism backlash - and specifically by the discussion of how it must be ok to just _say_ things to women - after all, it's just speech, how could it be dangerous?

To which my response was:
You wouldn't make the kind of statement in a rape survivor's group, after all. But the stats seem to show that if you're around more than 4 women then you _are_ in the middle of a rape survivor's group...
("The Stats" and much more can be found here on liberal conspiracy - a site I very much recommend. I don't intend to discuss them further, you can do your own damn reading.)

But anyway - the point is that pretty much everyone knows someone who was raped. Of the nine people currently asserting otherwise on the poll I personally know that three of them are wrong. Someone else commented saying that at least one other one was wrong. I'd like to think that there was at least one person on my friends list who didn't know any sexual assault victims, but I wouldn't care to place money on it. And this raises fear levels - because it makes it much more real than if you didn't know people who are involved. I don't know anyone who's been stabbed (at least I don't think I do), so the stuff in the papers about knife crime kinda bounces off, but sexual assault is much more personal, because it's happened to people I care about deeply.

And it's a crime more likely to be committed by a person you know. With all of the people I know, for instance, about it was friends, or friends of friends. Which leads to mistrust of _all men_. You can't tell from a distance, and so you lost trust that you can open up to anyone.

I was once hanging out with a woman at a convention - we'd met a few times before and got on well, friended each other, exchanged the odd email, etc. And this time, we arrived at the hotel with bags of chips in our hands and needed somewhere to eat them where the staff wouldn't get upset. So I suggested my room. And she gave me an odd look - and it took me a moment to realise that that look was suspicion of my motives. So I reassured her, and we got the lift up. And when we got out she thanked me for not trying to kiss her. Because a _lot_ of men she'd shared lifts with under similar circumstances with had tried something like that. She's in a relationship. She's never shown any interest in me.

And she thanked me. For not trying to kiss her. And I've never been so astounded in my life.

It's insane. It makes me weep for what many women have to go through every sodding day.

I work very hard to make sure people I know feel comfortable around me. I'm naturally huggy and touchy-feely, and it took me a long time to realise that it made some people feel uncomfortable, because I came from a background that _was_ very safe. But eventually I realised that I had to back off. So you won't see me making the first move when it comes to hugging most people, because I do _not_ want to fall into the category of "sleazy man who hugs people to get close to them." And I only have to worry about that because of complete dick's who do that.

There are, if you're lucky, two categories of men in women's head - ones that are safe to be around, and ones that aren't. And you can, if you like, be blunt about sex, and not worry about people's previous experiences, and whether they jump slightly whenever people make any connection between them and sex, and whether they know you well enough to open up to you at all. But you're very likely to be places into category B.

And no, I'm not telling you what to do, or how to speak. Just saying that the world is _not_ a Safe Space, and that we all need to be aware of the consequences of what we say and how we act around people.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

And this is, of course, also a response to the OSBP, which struck me as one of those misguided things which was probably fine with the few people who were first involved in it, but OMG so not fine as a general meme.

Also - when she did get back to my room we ate chips and discussed databases. Which was exactly the kind of geeky fun I'd had in mind when I invited her back.

When we met up with her partner later on she actually told them that she trusted me and I'd behaved well. As if not being a complete bastard was worthy of note.

I weep, I really do.

That article does a nice job of cherrypicking the statistics to make their case.

The BCS figures are the interesting bit - and generally considered to be reliable.

The "Have known women who..." bits clearly not as much use.

I'm curious, because I've been following the conversation but haven't commented yet - you seem to have a real hard-on, if you'll excuse the expression, for doubting the rape and sexual assault stats. I understand, sort of, if this is just a generalized hate for statistics which are often mis-used but it more reeks of not wanting to face the fact that the vast majority of women have been the victim of sexualized violence.

I think you are an exceptional person, Andy.

The whole thing seemed a bit bizarre to me.

What percentage of women have been sexually assaulted? is an interesting question. Of those women what percentage have experienced the different types / levels of sexual assault?

A question along the lines of 'What percentage of people know a woman (or perhaps person) who has been sexually assaulted in some way?". Leads to very high numbers without that necessarily meaning something really bad is happening to a lot of people.

For example: I have had a very drunken girl kiss me unexpectedly. I did not want to be kissed by this girl, so it was a type of sexual assault. It was more of an annoyance than something I'd be terribly upset about though. But if you then asked my (let's say) 20 friends if they knew anyone who had been sexually assaulted they'd all have to say yes. If I then said "[very high > 90]% of people surveyed know someone who has been sexually assaulted" you get a very different idea from what (in my case) actually happened (in terms of how bad the assault was, and how rare it was).

The rarity thing is because to get useful information about how many people are sexually assaulted you have to somehow unpack / decompress the answer by plugging in the level of connectedness of people, which intuitively we don't do (and don't have any figures for).

So, I think the whole exercise is probably quite bankrupt and misleading.

> You wouldn't make the kind of statement in a rape survivor's group, after all. But the stats seem to show that if you're around more than 4 women then you _are_ in the middle of a rape survivor's group...

Yes, that's a very important point that seems to be forgotten a lot of the time.

I think society desperatly needs good information to be able to judge serious societal issues such as Rape. What REALLY pisses me off though, is the way that some of the rape studies are done because they invalidate the study. An example of this is "have you been presurised into sex". Yes, I know that this does cover seriouse issues such as someone f***ing with your mind, or threats, but it can also cover, "well my boyfriend really wanted to, but I didnt really feel in the mood, but I really wanted to make him happy, and I have no regrets". Ok, Rant over.

I would also say I probably know a lot more woman that have been raped then I think I do. I suspect a lot of them keep it quiet.

Absolutely.

A few thoughts occur:

1) I sometimes get the feeling that the PC thing to do is to assume that any one I'm interested in is a potential rape victim, and therefore any advances should be made with a ten foot pole, wrapped in koosh balls. Basically, as non-threatening and non-sexual as possible.

Now, I think it's a great idea to not kick people when they're down, or in their sensitive bits. But I also don't think that it's healthy to assume that everyone is like that and therefore can't deal with it/needs respect in the form of treating them like a leper.

And this follows through into my second point.

2) I really don't like that sexual abuse victims are perceived as broken, shy, destroyed, and pretty much any form of helpless and damaged that you can imagine. It is something that can be gotten over, it is possible to live a normal life afterwards.

What's bankrupt? I'm completely confused by your response - I explicitly said that I _wasn't_ pulling figures from "who do you know that..." type questions, and linked to a page that included the following:
For the previous year (2004/5), the British Crime Survey recorded that 0.2% of female respondents reported having been raped at some point during the year, and if that figure is statistically valid - and the BCS survey is generally considered to be the more reliable measure of actual crime, then with a female population of 15.6 million, the estimated number of rapes using survey data would be around 31,000, a figure that doubles to 62-63,000 when you include attempted rape.

Overall, 2.8% of women reported to that BCS survey that, in the year it covered, they had been subjected to sexual violence of some description (included attempted assaults), which gives an extrapolated ‘raw’ figure of just over 435,000 women.
which strikes me as being about as hard as the data gets for these things.

I'm not sure exactly how you got the idea anyone was trying to go direct from my poll to hard numbers on victims.

Absolutely - and true of all people who have suffered trauma.

But if someone I knew had been in a car crash I'd be at least _careful_ with comments about pile-ups and fast driving.

::nod:: It's really a matter of pendulum, with me. Don't let it fly too far to one direction.

In regards to rape/sexual assault - and I'm talking actual assault or actual attempted assault, not a drunken snog (which unfortunately some men think is an example of sexual assault - ffs???), I'm talking about what comes after that - in most cases it *is* someone the woman knows. That's what makes it more difficult to trust blokes, because the woman has not solely been physically and sexually violated, but her trust and friendship towards that man has been violated.

But what also feeds into this whole issue is this excellent point you made:

how it must be ok to just _say_ things to women - after all, it's just speech, how could it be dangerous?

Well said. I know a lot of women who distrust men specifically because of comments that they've made. Specifically, comments along the lines of how women are like cars that can be taken out for a test drive, or comments that reflect an attitude that no matter what the bloke's personality and physical appearance he can (and *should* be able to) sleep with any woman he wants. Some might dismiss this as 'lol just male pride' but to carry this attitude around with you, that any woman you show attention to should be grateful for it and therefore reciprocate your feelings, is sickening and is a pretty good reason why a lot of women won't trust men and don't want to be alone with them...because attention and compliments of any type have a sexualised meaning behind them.

Regarding that last point I'd like to quote a piece of writing. It's kinda about the way abuse 'victims' are treated:

"I dislike the word ‘victim.’ When you read about car accidents or plane crashes in the newspaper, the victims are always the people who died. Those who live, no matter how grievously injured, are called ‘survivors.’ That’s a much better word. I find that when you treat people like victims, they start to act like victims, but if you treat a person like a survivor then they’ll start to act like a survivor. I am a survivor and I certainly don’t feel dead! I survived my childhood. You wouldn’t know it to look at me, would you? Even after 15-20 years it’s still difficult to talk about because I find that once I tell people about it, they start to treat me differently. I can’t understand it - I’m the same person they knew before I told them! I’m expected to be fragile and depressed but that’s not how I feel. I’m generally an upbeat and happy person. Sometimes they don’t know how to act around me, afraid to say or do anything in case I take offence or get upset. Sometimes they become overbearing, telling me what I should or should not do, as if they can protect me from something that happened so far in the past. It rather angers me that people would think I am so weak as to have not come to terms with it after all this time! Usually I don’t bother telling people at all. After all, it’s not something that affects me on a day to day basis. I hardly even think about it any more and the memory has been so dulled with time that now when I think about it I feel like I’m remembering a memory rather than the actual events.

I have, however, told my partner as it is very important to be able to trust your partner. One of the fantastic things about him is that it hasn’t changed the way he treats me at all. After I’d told him, he simply asked me if it bothered me any more. When I said it didn’t, he accepted it. Now, before you jump to any silly conclusions I’d like to point out that it wasn’t my parents. It doesn’t really matter who they were and to be perfectly frank, I don’t even know all their names. Of the four, three of them were people in a position of responsibility who took advantage of their authority. It’s been too long to feel anything like anger towards them. Instead I feel a rather condescending contempt at their weakness. It is an ignoble soul who preys on those smaller and meeker than themselves. With the fourth, it may surprise you to learn, I now have an amenable acquaintanceship. He explained what was going through his mind at the time and he himself was young at the time. While I cannot condone his actions, I can at least understand his motivations. We have, as they say, made our peace. It is a cliche but I have to say that I would not undo it if I could, for it has helped shape me into the person I am today ... and I quite like the person I am today! I may be a little more cynical but I am also much stronger than before."

A very good way of putting it. I'm known for saying ridiculously stupid and inappropriate things, unfortunately, but do constantly constantly try. Oddly enough, when it's a particularly sensitive subject/group, I'm always excellent...

My comment was meant in the context of the "who do you know that..."

Imagine I began it with "Here's what I think of the who do you know that... questions"

I'd have to say, out of all my boyfriends/girlfriends/dalliances, you have been the only *male* that never touched upon the subject in an inappropriate way. But then we both came to realise that one of the reasons I choose you was that, despite whatever annoying stuff you have (and everyone has annoying stuff, that's not a dig at you), you're incredibly, incredibly safe. I love that about you.

Absolutely. The language is incredibly important.

A friend told me recently that she pulls faces when walking home at night to avoid being hit on.

I can't imagine how anyone could think that hitting on someone walking home alone would be a good idea. It's madness.

I feel pretty uncomfortable about this entire meta discussion. Will discuss with you in private sometime.

But I do think one of the big problems with believing, or "perceptions of", the stats, is that when you say "rape", everyone - including women - thinks of a stranger in an alley. Whereas, just as with child abuse, most forced sex, non consensual sex or sexual assualt happens with people you know, often partners or husbands. (marital rape was in fact legally impossible till really quite reasonably.) "Date rape" captures some of this but again trivialises the issue as it's just as common in long term relationships as in one night stands (says seh: I have no stats for this but it's my impression from talking to lawyers, policemen etc.) It's just harder to convince a court of this - or to get someone to take on a prosecution.

Below you can see a few guys - at least one of whom I know to be apparently perfectly reasonable - discussing how women having sex because their partner is keen and they're not in the mood but it'd easier just to give in than to argue, is AOK. is it really guys? Anyhow, however you feel, it will affect the nos in these stats.

Another point no one's really touched on is that when you ask people if they "know" someone who has suffered rape or assault, they will filter it through these perceptions as to whether they decide they believe the reported account. And there are general credibility problems - short skirts etc - which is one of very many reasons why rape reports are so low.

I think much here is rather binary and un-nuanced. Not all men are rapists and not all women are victims and not all men and women perceive things like that, and the truth is way more grey.

I'm gonna split my response into 2 parts. This one deals with the mathmatics of the subject, which piss me off as they are misleading. The 2nd part I will make more general as a comment to Andy at the bottom of the rest.

I've been in 2 car accidents. Neither of which I would describe myself as a "survivor" of. The seriousness of each car accident has to be taken on its own merits.

Rape is a pretty clinical term. Yes you can have degrees of seriousness of it, but anything that can be termed rape is already pretty fucking serious to begin with. Sexual molestation however is not. If were talking about someone grabbing someones arse, than the poll is 100%. Period. Hell I would even say that given that definition, I've been sexually molested. Basically for this reason the poll is bad.

Further more, I answered no to the question, because he said "know of" and I'm pretty sure at least one of my friends has been raped, statistically speaking, due to the number of people I know. Let's change the question to how many people have been raped, and suddenly that 90%+ becomes 1% or 2%. This is because we know a lot of people, simple as that. I dare say if the question was how many have been assaulted the percentage would be 100%, though the actual percentage of people would be much lower.

There are lies, damned lies and statistics someone once said. How true this is.

I had a big rant planned for this, but I'm really struggling to formulate the right response. Everytime I start, there are tangents I am going down that lead onto huge paragraphs of exceptions. So I shall be concise:-

I don't believe that there are a huge proportion of women being raped, nor a large proportion of men capable of doing so. Women get the rough end of the deal in this society at the moment which regards to sexual innuendo and harrassment, but shouldn't tar every male with the brush that others deserve.

Gah. So much to say on the subject but without people to bounce ideas off in person it is difficult to respond to this subject without risking upsetting or offending someone when just trying to put your point across.

Damn you Andy. Can your next poll be on Sushi please?

It's not a _huge_ proportion. It's only about 9% over their lifetime.

Threaded | Top-Level Comments Only

Page 1 of 3

Somewhere that was leading

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject

no subject