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

Started by ampersand, Jan 04, 2006, 07:07 AM

previous topic - next topic
Go Down

ampersand

Quote from: "aknapp1112"
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.


so, in other words, she asked the right questions to specific persons to get the answers that were wanted?


Well, the question was "how often are women raped?" The answer to that question was found by surveying women. What about that seems illogical to you?

To repeat what I just said in another post, if Koss had ever said that her data was useful for comparing the experiences of male and female rape victims, then your criticism would be legitimate. However, Koss has never made such a claim; her study is clearly described as a study of rape prevalence among college women.

Quote
isnt this pretty much what that one survey did, about men getting custody 70% of the time in contested custody fights? they asked specific people, specific questions to fit into what they wanted the "survey" to say? so, along these lines, couldnt i then come up with a survey showing that 85% of men of beaten by their wives (all i have to do is ask the right people)


I have no idea what the "one survey" you're referring to is.

However, Koss used a representative sample of college women; she did not, for instance, survey only clients of abuse help centers (which is the sort of extreme cherry-picking you'd have to engage in to get the 85% statsitic you suggest). Your accusation that Koss cherry-picked the sample is not justified by evidence, as far as I know.

Quentin0352

Amp, why are you dodging me here? You claimed that using coercion and drugs was "simple rape" on your blog but now you are claiming they really are not rape at all. Which is it?

Also did you see the thread with the studies done on male rape using a system very close to the Koss one and standard ones used to show how many women are raped?

http://www.standyourground.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=7909

http://www.psychiatrictimes.com/menreact.html

Quote
Only a few studies have exclusively examined the effects of female sexual coercion of adult men. The classic work is that of Sarrel and Masters (1982) who discussed the emotional impact on 11 men who had been sexually molested by females. In the course of counseling for sexual problems, the men revealed recent and past incidents of forcible rape, abuse by a baby-sitter, incest and assault by a dominant woman. The authors documented a posttraumatic reaction involving depression and sexual aversion and dysfunction.


We already have THOUSANDS of studies done exclusively of women raped by men and are funding many more but men being raped by women is almost unstudied and any funding for them is hard to get by comparison. You talk about under reporting yet here is an understudied item that seems to be no real issue for you in the disparity department just like how men being abused is much more under reported than women being abused doesn't seem much of a problem for you.

But hey, in the end you threatened to ban me for saying about the same tings you just claimed her about rape but I applied it to both equally while you have different definitions depending if a man or a woman is the victim. If it is a man, they have to be drugged and tied up with force before you call it rape at all but "simple rape" is any unwanted sexual contact a woman suffers at all.

ampersand

Quote from: "aknapp1112"
Quote
That was the finding the authors emphasized. However, they also found that women were seven and a half times as likely as men to report a partner having attempted or succeeded in using physical force to make them have sex. So I don't think your criticism is really accurate.

(Citation: "Male and female recipients of unwanted sexual contact in a college student sample: prevalence rates, alcohol use, and depression symptoms," in Sex Roles: A Journal of Research, Feb, 1999 by Mary E. Larimer, Amy R. Lydum, Britt K. Anderson, and Aaron P. Turner).


so, is it force to have sex, or unwanted sexual contact? you say above it is sex, but your citation says unwanted sexual contact (which would include a kiss goodnight after a bad date?)


The term used by this study was "sexual intercourse," as in "In the past year, have you been in a situation where someone used some degree of PHYSICAL FORCE (twisting your arm, holding you down, etc.) to get you to have sexual intercourse with them when YOU DIDN'T WANT TO." I don't think anyone would interpret "sexual intercourse" to mean a goodnight kiss.

ampersand

Quote from: "Quentin0352"
Quote
I do know of one study which did a gender-neutral Koss survey, asking Koss' questions equally of male and female students. The study had a tiny sample size, so it's statistical power is pretty low (as the authors themselves admitted). What they found is that men and women were equally likely to "experience unwanted sexual contact" - but unwanted sexual contact, as the authors used the term, is a broader category than rape, and includes things like giving in to a partner's frequent arguments.


Interesting since when someone claimed "simple rape" was something MRSa wanted banned, those were the kinds of rape that were pointed out, not actual "simple rape" and you said you were going to ban me for arguing AGAINST that being "simple rape" which is a crime. So is it OK to rape men using alcohol and coercion but not women in your world since you are now arguing that it isn't really rape and the definition is too broad while on your own blog you argued it was actually rape?


And a few posts later...

Quote
Amp, why are you dodging me here? You claimed that using coercion and drugs was "simple rape" on your blog but now you are claiming they really are not rape at all. Which is it?


I'm not dodging you; I merely don't find you worth responding to, because in my experience you make things up. So answering you is a lower priority for me than answering other, more responsible posters.

Here's how I defined "simple rape" on the thread you're talking about:

Quote from: "ampersand on alas"
"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).


I don't count unwanted sex due to giving in to repeated arguments as rape, regardless of if the victim is a man or a woman. I do count it as rape if someone has sex with a victim who, due to drugs or alcohol, is actually unable to resist or consent - again, regardless of victim's sex. And I've never said otherwise, so please stop claiming I have.

Finally, I never said I'd ban you over the simple rape question. I said I'd ban you - and, in fact, did ban you - because you made up lies about what other posters had said, which you weren't able to back up.

dr e

Wasn't the following question seen as contaminating things by diluting the definition of rape?

Quote
Has anyone, male or female, ever put fingers or objects in your vagina or anus against your will or by using force or threats?


I think it is used in at least one of your links Amp.

The above sure doesn't sound like what most of us think might describe the horrible crime of rape.  Does it to anyone here?
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

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.


What claim would that be?


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"?


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...


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.


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?"


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.


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.


What peer-reviewed works support Koss' conclusions?


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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.


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)
"Men in teams... got the human species from caves to palaces. When we watch men's teams at work, we pay homage to 10,000 years of male achievements; a record of vision, ingenuity and Herculean labor that feminism has been too mean-spirited to acknowledge."  Camille Paglia

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.


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.  


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.


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.


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.


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.


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


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.


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..
"The man who speaks to you of sacrifice, speaks of slaves and masters. And intends to be the master." -- Ayn Rand<br /><br />

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.


What claim would that be?


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."



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?
he Biscuit Queen
www.thebiscuitqueen.blogspot.com

There are always two extremes....the truth lies in the middle.

dr e

Amp - Wasn't it Koss who said:
Quote
"rape represents an extreme behavior but one that is on a continuum with normal male behavior within the culture."


So here we seem to have a woman who thinks that normal male behavior includes rape.  Don't you think that anyone with this sort of thinking would be a biased researcher on the topic of rape?
Contact dr e  Lifeboats for the ladies and children, icy waters for the men.  Women have rights and men have responsibilties.

KellyMB

Ampersand, Mr Bad, Quentin0352, et al. Thanks, this is a really good thread, a real debate. No Ginmars or NYMOM's to hurl obscenities, instead of ideas. No ad hominum attacks. I for one am glad that Amp came over here to debate. I disagree with him almost completly, but I think his being here is really bringing out the best at SYG. Keep it up, there is a lot more to debate!

Factory

While I completely think Amp is an emasculated woman-firster (you'd have to be in my place to understand the context of this remark...suffice it to say it's not meant as an insult) I have gained a fair measure of respect for him.  Definitely a LOT more than I would extend to the shreiking Harpy's on his Blog gleefully dividing up the territory amongst thamselves it seems.

The recurring issue I see continually in these debates (which ARE informative and entertaining) is an increasing focus on semantics.  The Micro replaces the Macro these days.  Point is, men are discriminated against...repeatedly, with great enthusiasm, and BY LAW.  If discrimination is wrong...why was the current discriminatory regime put in place?

If equality means equality of outcome...why is it OK if men fare poorly in school (which shows a STRONG correlation to changing educational priorities)?

If equality means anything AT ALL other than "more priveleges for women ", why has nothing been done to address the myriad of pressing issues that face men?

And Amp...if these things ARE important...how many more "women's issues" need to be addressed before it's OK to address men's issues in a meaningful (and respectful) way?  You know...one where we don't blame men?

Mr. Bad

Ok, I've accessed the 1987 Koss study* funded in part by the Ms. Foundation and have a few initial comments.  I haven't had a chance to review Koss' discussion and conclusions, so I'll present that later.  For now let's look at her methodology and results.

First, the most obvious problem is that Ms. Foundation staffers participated in the administration of the study, which raises serious red flags vis-a-vis conflict of interest issues.  This is like having a drug company who funds a clinical trial of one of their new drugs participate in the adminstration of that trial.  'Nuff said on that score.

Next, Koss admits her sample is not representative, not even of colleges and universities in the U.S.  For example, she showed that New England and the Southwest were overrepresented by approximately double their national enrollment figures and that the West sample was only about 1/3 of what it should have been in a representative sample of colleges and universities in the U.S.  Thus, we likely have some signficant bias in the sample due to the overrepresentation of New England and the Southwest and underrepresentation of the West.  

Another problem was with the survey itself.  Although it was validated for the men included in the study (yes, you'd never know it from the feminist rhetoric, but men were indeed measured.  More on this later), no attempt was made to validate the women's responses.  The investigators were suspicious of men's honesty vis-a-vis responding so the did follow-up interviews with a sample of the men to test validity; on the other hand, the investigators trusted the female participants implicitly.  This is an of itself demonstrates investigator bias.  However, to their credit, the male respondents who were tested for validity reponded at the 93% level.  That is, 93% of the men gave the exact same responses on the self-reported survey as the did when interviewed; in the rest of the cases at least one response differed.  As I said, no attempt was made to validate the female responses.  

The above is important because the results for men and women differ drastically.  For women, 6.5% percent of respondents reported being raped during the previous 12 month period (this is likely where the "one in four" factoid comes from.  If you take that rate and muliply it by 4 years - the usual period a person is an undergrad in college - you get about 25%.  However, this is not a valid method to calculate this probability.), 10.1% report attempted rape, 11.5% report "sexual coercion" and 27.8% report "unwanted sexual contact."  However, for men - whose responses were validated - the numbers are much lower:  0.7% report perpetrating what the law defines as rape and 3.2% report perping rape under Koss' broader definitions of rape, which includes legal rape, intercourse while the woman was intoxicated, and "nonconsensual forcible oral or anal penetration."  For sexual victimization (i.e., all categories included in this study, from rape to "attempted fondling") since the age of 14, 46.3% of women reported no victimization and 74.8% of men reported no victimizing.  For rape, 15.4% of women reported being victimized and 4.4% of men report perpetrating.  Clearly the numbers reported by Koss, et al. show that 1) women are not raped as often as the "1 in 4" myth claims, and that 2) a relatively small number of men are perpetrating acts of sexual victimization.  

As I said, I'll read the rest of the article later, but it appears clear at least to me that feminist activists have misrepresented Koss' work.  Which BTW looks within reasonable academic standards, at least for the social sciences.  However, due to serious methodological problems, generalizing these results to the population at large is not appropriate.  

Reference:
Koss, Mary P., Christine A. Gidycz, and Nadine Wisniewski, (1987) "The Scope of Rape: Incidence and Prevalence of Sexual Aggression and Victimization in a National Sample of Higher Education Students." The Journal of Consulting and Clinical Psychology v 55 (2) pp. 162-170.

(edited once for formatiing and once for clarity)
"Men in teams... got the human species from caves to palaces. When we watch men's teams at work, we pay homage to 10,000 years of male achievements; a record of vision, ingenuity and Herculean labor that feminism has been too mean-spirited to acknowledge."  Camille Paglia

FP

Quote from: "KellyMB"
Ampersand, Mr Bad, Quentin0352, et al. Thanks, this is a really good thread, a real debate. No Ginmars or NYMOM's to hurl obscenities, instead of ideas. No ad hominum attacks. I for one am glad that Amp came over here to debate. I disagree with him almost completly, but I think his being here is really bringing out the best at SYG. Keep it up, there is a lot more to debate!



"I came here for an argument!
Oh, I'm sorry, but this is abuse. You want room 12A down the hall."




:D

Go Up