The Sexist Researcher Strikes Back! A latest revised version of SES-V by Mary P. Koss and her team although includes made to penetrate but skews findings by using an FBI definition of rape

curiossceptic · 2024-11-20T16:20:09+00:00

Is she the person who denied male rape victims in a radio interview?

Current_Finding_4066 · 2024-11-20T16:10:37+00:00

Interesting that oral penetration only counts. Is sucking on someones penis without their consent not rape?

It also seems you can penetrate penis. It does have a hole.

Or literally stuffing someone genitals into your own, as when women rape men and boys. How exactly is that different and not rape? Why such biased, obviously gynocentric rape definition?

It is obvious that such biased and antiquated gendered definitions need to be replaced by gender neutral ones.

fpschechnya · 2024-11-20T19:31:51+00:00

These people do it intentionally. It is pure evil/hate.

63daddy · 2024-11-20T16:46:50+00:00

Neither link provides the precise questions asked on the survey, but it appears to me the survey still suffers two notable problems:

Selection bias: “Participants were recruited from a crowdsourcing platform”. That’s not random sampling so one shouldn’t be using that data as representative of the population as a whole. Recruiting participants tends to draw people who have experienced what’s being researched, so again it’s not representative of the entire population.
Not actually measuring reports of sexual assault. The survey asks a number of questions about experiences the participants have and then the surveyors decide what responses they wish to count as sexual assaults, even if the participants aren’t claiming they were assaulted. That’s very different from measuring sexual assault reporting.

In addition to actual crime reporting, colleges are required under Cleary and Title IX to log reports of sexual assault. So, the question that comes to mind is why the big effort to push feminist survey information rather than actual, more objective reporting data?

When Koss’s original survey was claiming 1:4 college women were raped, more objective reporting showed a rate of 6 in 1,000. (Link)

https://bjs.ojp.gov/library/publications/rape-and-sexual-assault-among-college-age-females-1995-2013

Raphe9000 · 2024-11-20T20:15:35+00:00

To be fair, the FBI definition does include victims of made-to-penetrate, as the wording doesn't tie victimhood to being penetrated but merely to being in a situation where penetration happens without the consent of one of the parties.

That definition is, however, still missing some important ways men can be raped.

Mainly, it makes it so that a man can only be raped if he is forced to give oral, penetrated anally, or forced to penetrate a vagina, anus, or mouth. This specifically excludes the ability for men to be raped by being made to penetrate objects (such as sex toys, while objects which penetrate are explicitly counted for), and it means that a forced handjob or other similar actions would also not be rape while forced fingering would.

It is technically even unclear by reading that definition whether or not a man being forced to give oral to a woman would be considered penetration, but I imagine that merely licking wouldn't while any form of sucking or penetrating with one's tongue would. This could also apply to a woman being forced to lick a man's penis, so it's not necessarily inherently discriminatory, even if it does violate the spirit of equality in anti-rape legislation due to it being very obviously easier for a woman to receive oral from a man without penetration.

It is also unclear how exactly they define "vagina". I am assuming that they mean the vaginal canal, but they could also mean the female genitalia as a whole, as the former is the medical/scientific definition and the latter the colloquial one. The vaginal canal is usually not the main source of pleasure for a woman, so a woman may be able to simply get away with more as an aggressor but can be forced to receive sexual pleasure without it being considered rape in the same way that a man can.

Now, the whole "penetration" thing can both ways, presumably also meaning a man is legally a rape victim if he was forced to finger a woman but a woman is not a rape victim if she was forced to give a man a handjob, and that is also an injustice that should be addressed. This wording simply means that penetrating a woman at all is rape while a man being made to penetrate is only sometimes rape, something that obviously makes male-on-female rape the easiest to fall under the legal definition.

The main issue in her conclusion, however, is that it neglects that men simply are much less likely to come forward about being rape victims; many don't even know that they're rape victims because they haven't been taught to know when their consent has been violated, instead being led to believe that they were "unknowingly asking for it" or simply didn't communicate well enough. This can apply to all forms of sexual exploitation, as men are not taught to even begin to be able to identify when it happens to them.

As always, I think this article is highly valuable: https://slate.com/human-interest/2014/04/male-rape-in-america-a-new-study-reveals-that-men-are-sexually-assaulted-almost-as-often-as-women.html

Capable-Mushroom99 · 2024-11-21T02:50:13+00:00

Repeating the same lie about the FBI definition; it does include “made to penetrate”. As stated when the definition was changed:

“ Effectively, the revised definition expands rape to include both male and female victims and offenders, and reflects the various forms of sexual penetration understood to be rape”

https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2016/crime-in-the-u.s.-2016/resource-pages/rape-addendum

I don’t know why people think they can make their own interpretation to fit their agenda. If penetration occurs without the consent of the man he is the victim and the definition is clearly met, even if it is the victims penis penetrating the woman.

Comments