Stand Your Ground Forums > Main

Response to Mr. Bad re: Farrell, Koss, and Archer

<< < (5/29) > >>

Mr. Bad:

--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---
--- Quote from: "Mr. Bad" ---
--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---The bottom line is, you made a claim that you're unable to back up. That's not my fault.
--- End quote ---


What claim would that be?
--- End quote ---


The claim that there are peer-reviewed papers by feminist which use results from shelter samples to claim that "one in for women are beaten by their loved ones."


--- Quote from: "Mr. Bad" ---
--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---Can you cite a peer-reviewed paper which used results from surveying shelters to improperly claim that "one in four women are beaten by their loved ones"?
--- End quote ---


Not off the top of my head, but I know that they exist.  For example, Johnath Archer (2002)  wrote peer-reviewed responses to his critics outlining cases such as the ones I describe and you challenge...
--- End quote ---


I've now reviewed three different papers by Archer - the one you cited, his 2000 paper and his 2000 response to critics - and none of them support your claim.


--- Quote from: "Mr. Bad" ---Like I said, I haven't seen where Farrell has made any false claims about Koss' work, so until you show me something I can't comment on this.
--- End quote ---


I showed you two clear examples, neither of which you've rebutted in the slightest. I'll repeat what I wrote before:

In Myth of Male Power, Farrell wrote:


--- Quote from: "Warren Farrell" ---A Ms-sponsored study which the mass media widely quoted as saying that 25 percent of all women were raped by the time they were in college used this question to reach the 25 percent figure:


--- Quote ---"Have you given in to sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because you were overwhelmed by a man's continual arguments and pressure?"
--- End quote ---

--- End quote ---


Two problems with this passage. First of all, the study in question found that 25% of college women have experienced rape or attempted rape at some time in their life; the number for completed rape is closer to 12%. One could argue that Farrell was just repeating how the study was reported in the mass media, but it's irresponsible to do so without also reporting the correct figure. Besides, Farrell clearly attributes the 25 percent figure to the study itself - it is the study, not the media, which (according to Farrell) "used this question to reach the 25 percent figure." But the study never claimed that 25 percent of women have been raped.

Second, and more important, problem: The study never used that question for calculating rape prevalence. (The study did contain that question, but used it only to report instances of "pressuring" - not rape.) Anyone could verify this by reading the study itself (The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology v 55 (2) p. 162-170).

So Farrell, in "criticizing" the study, misrepresents both the study's results and its methodology. Although to be fair, this might be the result of extreme carelessness, rather than actual dishonesty.

Now, you say that you're not interested in Koss because you find her unreliable. But you also said that you found Farrell reliable; therefore, the fact that he badly misrepresented Koss' study should be of interest to you, since it shows that Farrell actually misrepresents what he talks about quite badly.
--- End quote ---


If what you say is true then indeed it shows that Farrell may have misrepresented the Koss work, however, I need to check it out in context.  However, I can readily believe that he may indeed be criticizing the ridiculously common misuse by feminists of Koss' work, i.e., the "one in four" number, which Koss seems clearly to have refuted in her work.


I'll have to look at The Myth of Male Power again to verify your claims.



--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---
--- Quote ---
--- Quote ---What do you mean, "maybe"? When three non-peer-reviewed anti-feminists agree that Koss' research is bad, you think that's strong evidence; but if other peer-reviewed research and reviews support Koss' conclusions, then that's not strong evidence? It seems to me that's a double-standard.
--- End quote ---


What peer-reviewed works support Koss' conclusions?
--- End quote ---


The main findings Dr. Koss made about rape (as opposed to about sexual coercion in general) are: One, that rape was much more common than the official data sources at the time indicated. Two, that a very large proportion of rapes are never reported to police. Third, that rape is usually committed by someone known to the victim, not by a stranger.
--- End quote ---


Not true.  What Koss found was that college women (a very small subset of all women) report rape 1) more commonly than initially believed; 2) that college women allege rape in larger numbers on self-reported questionnaires than they do to police; and 3) that college women report that rapes by intimates are more common than by strangers.  

You're ignoring the extremely crucial point that Koss used 1) a very small subset of the general female population (making generalization to the population at large invalid); and 2) self-reported data which is notoriously unreliable unless it has been verfied by independent and objective methods such as physical exams, etc.  In other words, we have no idea whether or not the rapes the women reported actually occured.  This is a common issue when using self-reported data.  


--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---All three of these findings were widely suspected when Koss began her study, but had not been verified with social science research until Koss.
--- End quote ---


And indeed the Koss study did not verify them either - all Koss did was measure reporting of rape by college women, not actual rapes.  Which is why a baseline group for comparison, e.g., reporting by college men should have been measured as well.  


--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---These three findings have since been upheld by every nationwide survey designed to measure violence against women. That, in social science research, is usually the gold standard - if a finding can be repeated, then it should be taken seriously.

So which are these other studies?

   * The NIJ/CDC "National Violence Against Women Study" found that 14.8% of American women experience a completed rape at some time in their lifetime. A typical rape-defining question was worded like this: "Has a man or boy ever made you have sex by using force or threatening to harm you or someone close to you? Just so there is no mistake, by sex we mean putting a penis in your vagina."

   * The Department of Justice's Sexual Victimization of College Women study included a sub-study in which college women were asked about lifetime incidence of rape (most of the study asked about rape since the beginning of the school year, which isn't directly comparable to Koss). 10% of the women interviewed reported having been raped at some point in their lifetime. Rape was defined as "unwanted completed penetration by force or the threat of force."

   * There's also The National Women's Study (NWS), a large-scale national study which found that 13% of American women have been raped in their lifetime. Unfortunately, this study doesn't seem to be available online, but this webpage (written by one of the study authors) includes a lot of info from the survey - scroll about halfway down the page, or search for the phrase "National Research on Rape." The NWS results were published in a number of peer-reviewed publications.

A bunch of other peer-reviewed studies have confirmed Koss' results using non-national samples, but those three are the biggest ones.
--- End quote ---


All of the studies you cite don't measure actual rapes, they measure reporting.  Got any citations that use objective measures, e.g., physical exams, ER visits, etc.?


--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---
--- Quote ---The researchers I cited in turn used and cited primary data from among others the U.S. govt., which I tend to trust more than feminist ideologues like Koss, et al.  So sue me.
--- End quote ---


"Femnist idealogue" is an ad hom argument. If you had a decent case, you wouldn't rely on ad homs.
--- End quote ---


Political ideology is germane to the issue, as Archer et al. have shown in their meta-analyses.  Investigator bias and conflict of interest are real issues, regardless of whether or not you have the integrity to admit it.  


--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---At the time Koss did her study, there were two government sources on rape prevalence (now there are more, which I cited above). One, the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, counted only cases reported to police, which makes it useless for detecting the prevalence of an underreported crime like rape.
--- End quote ---


Not exactly - the FBI stats control for such things as false allegations, a common problem in rape crime statistics.  We can't really know that rape is "underreported" using unverified self-reported data.  IMO the FBI data is the most reliable data set we have, and it's not even that good because all it measures is arrests, not convictions.  Therefore, the FBI stats may actually overestimate rape because it includes cases that end in acquittals, i.e., the man is proven to be innocent.

Unless of course you take the "women never lie" and "all accused men are guilty" approach to rape.  


--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---The other, the NCVS, at the time got their numbers on rape by asking "were you attacked in some other way?" at the end of a long survey about crime - a method guaranteed to produce underreporting. (As well as the obvious problem of not actually asking about forced sex, many scholars - including Archer, whom you cited - are convinced that asking about intimate violence in the context of a crime survey leads to significant underreporting).

There was no other source of primary nantional data at the time of Koss' study, apart from the data gathered by Koss. And although Koss' work wasn't perfect, it was much better designed for measuring rape prevalence than either the NCVS or the UCR.
--- End quote ---


Nope, Koss work did not measure rape, it measured reporting of rape by college women using her exapanded definitions.  As far as I know, there was no validation of the data by independent, objective means to attempt to control for misclassification errors due to false reporting, investigator bias, etc.

(edited once for clarity)

Quentin0352:
Oh, care to show where I made anything up besides as an example of situations?

Also I suggest you try the FULL quotes instead of deceiving people...


--- Quote ---"Simple rape" is a term that some people use to refer to rape in which the victim knows her rapist and no gun or other weapon was used; this is in contrast to rapes committed by strangers. (See the way this college lecture outline uses the term, for example). The person she linked to was, in effect, calling for simple rape to be made legal - just as she claimed.
--- End quote ---


Now look at the link she used to back her claims and the definition of "simple rape" she used...

Elinor's quoted statement I challenged...


--- Quote ---It's everywhere and if you don't see it, you aren't paying attention. Read about the New Bedford gang rape case. That's well within your lifetime. Read about the psychological theorizing around "seductive children," the pedophile's rights movement, the hatred spewed at the complainant in the Kobe Bryant case, the MRA manifestos blatantly calling for the decriminalization of simple rape.  
--- End quote ---


I love how she tries to link MRAs/FRAs and pedophiles. You didn't seem to think that it was a problem to link those three but lord have mercy on anyone that actually linked women that raped and abused men. And of course the item from her link which YOU supported as being "Simple rape and is the kinds of things I described. So which definition are you going to use for rape today?


--- Quote ---37. End the criminalization of normal male sexual behavior.  Repeal all laws making male sexuality, exposure, penetration, etc., into a criminal act unless there is demonstrable physical harm to a victim.  Release and pardon all men who have been arrested for "statutory rape," "date rape," "spousal rape," "pornography," "soliciting a prostitute," and other weasel worded versions thereof. A woman's hurt feelings does not turn a man into a criminal.
--- End quote ---


So you say I am not worth your time because I make up stories? More like you avoid me because I actually do the research instead. BTW, remember you wanted me banned because I challenged all those definitions of rape that you are now saying are not rape. Nice double standards of definitions you are displaying there and in treatment based on the sex of the individual.

Care for more from your own blog from others and what is called rape that you never stated a differing opinion of?

From nice little Mary..


--- Quote ---Most men don't kidnap strange women off the street and put their penises in orifices of her body without her permission. Many, MANY men continue to have sex with their girlfriends or wives after she has indicated that she has lost interest in the sexual encounter and doesn't want to continue. That is rape, but they don't know it is.
--- End quote ---


Notice you talk a lot about being fair yet I was threatened with being banned and attacked repeatedly like the following. Now if feminist are so tolerant and looking just to have a fair playing field, then why are you threatening to ban people left and right like me for actually questioning things in a polite manner (though you said you could read my mind and that was why you planned to ban me!) and then allow attacks like this with barely a comment? Notice how you have actually received much better treatment and seen how arguments here have been backed up much better than you have on your blog? Interesting standards you keep demonstrating on all of this and keep avoiding addressing with some pretty lame excuses.


--- Quote ---Quentino, sweetie, fuck off. If I hate men, asshats like you are exactly the reason why. Think about it, dipshit. If you can't ask so much as ask me to clarify what I mean then do you think you're presenting the picture of someone who can be trusted to take 'no' for an answer? Good job. Thanks for making my case.
--- End quote ---


Yup, I really sank to that kind of level didn't I?

Sir Jessy of Anti:

--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---
--- Quote from: "poiuyt" ---
--- Quote ---Koss's study didn't ask men and women the same questions, so it would have been impossible for her to do what you've described here.
--- End quote ---


...Ahh. Then if so, what would any fair minded person conclude about the studies' premises, assumptions, results and interpretations ?
--- End quote ---


That it was a study of rape of women, not a study of rape of the general population. (Are you saying that it's never legitimate to do a study of men in particular, or of women in particular?)

If Koss claimed that her research could be used to compare rape prevalence between male and female vicitms, then you'd have a legitimate criticism. However, I've read the study, and I know that Koss makes no such claim.
--- End quote ---


If I can be so bold; I believe Poiuyt's point relates to my earlier quote below, that of the predetermined nature of class/gender crimes in the place of sociological investigation, namely the utilization of the paradigm, "man bad, women good" in the place of scientific research by begging the question, and loading the interpretive results.


--- Quote ---A similar survey could start with the premise that blacks are responsible for black on white crime (for the same crimes that also happen to blacks), and proceed to survey the whites about their levels of victimization by blacks and the blacks about their levels of perpetration against whites. Presto! Bias confirmed by survey findings.

Both studies would have no claim to impartiality..
--- End quote ---

sethay:

--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---
--- Quote from: "Mr. Bad" ---
--- Quote from: "ampersand" ---The bottom line is, you made a claim that you're unable to back up. That's not my fault.
--- End quote ---


What claim would that be?
--- End quote ---


The claim that there are peer-reviewed papers by feminist which use results from shelter samples to claim that "one in for women are beaten by their loved ones."
--- End quote ---



These articles do exist.  However, I don't think if I actually took the time to search and find a few it would not do any good.  You would just discount or makes excusses for them.  However, if you really want me to find some fore you, let me know.

The Biscuit Queen:
That study was indeed used by feminists to back the one in four myth. Whether or not the Ms surveyers meant it, the study is indeed being used as such. I have not heard any outcry by the scientists that thier work is so blatently misquoted.

I have read the survey, and it was packaged to make the numbers look more impressive than they are.

The sick thing is that one in ten women being raped is bad enough. Lying or misleading is just minimizing the impact. Just like pretending that taking precautionary measures is blaming the victim is minimizing the issue, or using terms like eye rape is minimizing. Don't feminists realize that the crime stands on its own without dramatization?

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

[*] Previous page

Go to full version