quote:

---

Does pornography breed rape? Do violent movies breed violent crime? Quite the opposite, it seems.

First, porn. What happens when more people view more of it? The rise of the Internet offers a gigantic natural experiment. Better yet, because Internet usage caught on at different times in different states, it offers 50 natural experiments.

The bottom line on these experiments is, "More Net access, less rape." A 10 percent increase in Net access yields about a 7.3 percent decrease in reported rapes. States that adopted the Internet quickly saw the biggest declines. And, according to Clemson professor Todd Kendall, the effects remain even after you control for all of the obvious confounding variables, such as alcohol consumption, police presence, poverty and unemployment rates, population density, and so forth.

---

So, which of these explanations is most probable?

[ 16 August 2007: Message edited by: Agent 204 ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Agent 204:
Not sure what to think of this claim:

Source. I can think of several ways to interpret this:
1. The claim is true- would-be rapists are sublimating their impulses with porn.
2. The statistic is true, and there is a causal relationship between Internet access and a lowered incidence of rape, but the actual causal factor is something other than porn- e.g. more resources being available to the potential victims that allow them to escape a bad situation before a rape occurs.
3. The statistic is true, but there is no direct causal relationship- for instance, better social conditions might mean both more Internet access and less rape. The researcher claims to have corrected for this, but without the actual paper and several of the papers it references, it's hard to say whether this will hold up.
4. The statistic is false. No shocker- badly done studies are conducted all the time (remember the "Lunar Effect"?)

So, which of these explanations is most probable?

[ 16 August 2007: Message edited by: Agent 204 ]

---

I'd go with number 1.

It seems to make a lot of sense, it was my thought on the matter a few years ago long before I encountered these statistics. Pornography yields a means of relieving internal sexual pressure. Men's behavior, both in my own experience and in discussion with others, changes very drastically depending on the frequency of ejaculation. I did an experiment on myself in my teens, to see what would happen if I went a long time without jerking-off. Within a surprisingly small number of days I was extremely testy, and was overthinking about sex. That was at 14 though. I've heard more or less the same from other guys.

[ 16 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
If number 1 were true then we should then see a decline in rape in those men exposed to porn yet somehow, and I'm going out on a small twig here, I doubt that is the case.

---

There is data showing that is the case. The declines followed the greater proliferation of the internet. And the internet very much correlates with access to pornography.

quote:

---

51% of all Canadian women have experienced at least one incident of sexual or physical violence.

---

quote:

---

62% of the victims who reported being sexually assaulted in 1998 were under the age of 18.

---

quote:

---

80% of sexual assaults occur at home; 49% in broad daylight.

---

Let's factor in all of the women and girls who don't report rape. Let's also factor in all those who report rape but have nothing done about it. Then let's factor in the amount of men who get off on rape charges for reasons other than not guilty.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Rape is to sex like getting hit in the face with a frying pan is to cooking.

---

It's possible that some potential rapists do not as a result of internet porn. It's equally possible that others become more likely to rape as a result.

quote:

---

In particular are you claiming that the introduction of the internet reduces the correlation between rape and rape reporting?

---

Absolutely not, because personally I really don't think men who view porn are less inclined to rape. There are many many repeat/serial rapists who state just the opposite, in fact. That their thirst for porn just got worse and worse (more and more twisted),they became desensitized to what they were viewing and therefore they could no longer utilize it.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Stargazer:
Who says rape has gone down? Reporting has gone down, but I highly highly doubt that rape has.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by arborman:
It's possible that some potential rapists do not as a result of internet porn. It's equally possible that others become more likely to rape as a result.

---

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: Agent 204 ]

Images of sexualized violence against women are everywhere. The internet, like many other forms of entertainment and information, echoes this.

I wouldn't want to hazard a guess as to why, or if, reporting of rape has decreased. Porn has been around for millenia, the internet has changed levels of access only.

I will assume that the incidents of rape have remained constant, at around 2 out of 3, or 3 in 4 women, depending on which stats you look at. That's a fuck of a lot, guys, and I say "guys" deliberately.

If you all can try to remember that women are most likely to be raped by someone they know, and if you pay attention to the ways in which minor or major rape stories get carried in the media, you may understand why women report at a rate of about 10% and as Stargazer said, when women do report, and men are charged, very rarely does it result in a conviction.

quote:

---

I suggest everyone who hasn't to please read Jane Doe's book "The Story of Jane Doe: A Book About Rape". She's one of my heroes.

---

quote:

---

For those who like the trite comment "correlation does not imply causation", well no, it doesn't. However, if two things correlate very well the fair assumption is that there is, in fact, some sort of relationship rather than complete coincidence.

---

It's not trite. It's very very important to be clear on these things.

It's possible to cook a survey so that two factors are correlated, and then to publish that survey with a heavy implication of causation.

It's a dangerous approach, because you can convince reasonable people of some pretty outrageous things.

I remember reading such a study, by a professor who was trying to 'prove' that women were inferior police officers. His method was to create a statistical model that related female versus police officers. He would speak of the model, saying 'adding more female officers causes this effect'....

It made it seem that if you add more police officers to a force, the results would be negative. But he was speaking about *his* model.

Additionally, there is a great deal of difference between letting the numbers speak for themselves, or constantly manipulating how parameters are weighed and which are used to reach the desired conclusion.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Sexual assault statistics in Canada:

Source: Metropolitan Action Committee on Violence Against Women and Children (METRAC)

---

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: Solid_Choke ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solid_Choke:
1/2 of all women? That seems kind of high.

---

51% is not accurate, it is too low, though it is those who have reported it officially, not through a poll, do you not read links?

quote:

---

I hope this isn't like the American study where they included women who didn't actually feel that they had been raped but instead had said that they had "regretted having sex" with someone after an act was completed.

---

You know what, you need to leave this forum.

quote:

---

[qb]Would 1/2 of those women actually feel that they had been raped or was that the decision of the person doing the poll based on their answers [qb]

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solid_Choke:
1/2 of all women? That seems kind of high. I hope this isn't like the American study where they included women who didn't actually feel that they had been raped but instead had said that they had "regretted having sex" with someone after an act was completed. Would 1/2 of those women actually feel that they had been raped or was that the decision of the person doing the poll based on their answers?

---

quote:

---

Additionally, there is a great deal of difference between letting the numbers speak for themselves, or constantly manipulating how parameters are weighed and which are used to reach the desired conclusion.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by 500_Apples:
...manipulating how parameters are weighed and which are used to reach the desired conclusion.

---

Desired conclusion? WTF is that supposed to mean? Like, what? Feminists want the rape stats to be high? This is an ignorant hurtful dumbass thing to say.

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:
Desired conclusion? WTF is that supposed to mean? Like, what? Feminists want the rape stats to be high? This is an ignorant hurtful dumbass thing to say.

---

Yes, I read that as well, but have been through a recent similar conversation about rape with him in another thread and had decided to walk away from this thread with 10 men participating to the 4 women.

And again, I ask why is a thread regarding female issues not in the feminist forum? I had thought we had agreed after the last go around in the Duke threads, all such things would be moved immediately to the feminist forum.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: remind ]

quote:

---

The more complicated the model, the more parameters, the easier to prove just about anything. That's a very simple lesson in undergraduate science. However, that lesson does not apply here as there are only two parameters. The spread of the internet, and the trend in rape cases known by authorities.

---

Prove what ?

Correlation ?

Who cares ?

quote:

---

Originally posted by bigcitygal:

Desired conclusion? WTF is that supposed to mean? Like, what? Feminists want the rape stats to be high? This is an ignorant hurtful dumbass thing to say.

My desired fucking conclusion is to have no more rape. Jesus fucking cripes.

---

The term "desired conclusions" was obviously alluding to the police officers study.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michael Hardner:

Prove what ?

Correlation ?

Who cares ?

Nobody should be publishing information for wide consumption about correlations; the information is too prone to misunderstanding.

---

That's a nice idealistic perspecttive, however, it's not very practical. Most scientific conclusions these days are based on a combination of mechanisms and correlations. For example, smoking and lung cancer. There's a correlation, and there's a mechanism, and at some point the scientific authorities and the public decided a reasonable degree of confidence had been reached. Just as in this study, there is a correlation and a mechanism. Ultimately, things like mechanisms, motives and such are never enough to prove a claim on their own as they're written up and conjured theoretically. Theory always works - in theory. In practice, people expect numbers to back them up. If, hypothetically, you saw a study which drew a strong correlation between how much milk men drink and how many daughters they have, would you say "correlations are irrelevent!!!" or would you find that kind of interesting, and wonder what's going on?

Secondly, and this is a thread drift, I disagree with your last sentence. I don't think we should put vast amounts off knowledge as being off-limits because someone somewhere might make a harmful conclusion.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: 500_Apples ]

quote:

---

Rape may be about power, but that doesn't say anything about the actions and motivations of the rapist...

---

quote:

---

Yes, I read that as well, but have been through a recent similar conversation about rape with him in another thread and had decided to walk away from this thread with 10 men participating to the 4 women.

---

And why is always the same handlful of guys that don't get it, who get into shit for the same things everytime that can't stop putting in their two cents in these threads. It's pretty obvious that they aren't learning if they aren't approaching these threads differently so why are we tolerating them? I don't mind educating but I do mind having to deal over and over again with the usual suspects and covering the same ground.

500_apples - that was a quick edit you did there on that swipe at BCG. It was also kinda sexist telling her to calm down and that it isn't all about her, but then again maybe you have just learned something, you have learned enough to not get banned.

We should all really know better by now than to engage you at all in this forum. By engaging you we end up making the threads in this forum about you, and about educating you and that's not what we are here for. Anyone with a real interest in the subject does more listening to us discuss issues about us than hijacking.

Sorry for being harsh, but this is a forum - and rape is a topic - that is full of sensitive issues for a lot of people, and chiming in with insensitive (even inadvertently insensitive) remarks is not okay.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: Michelle ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Scout:

500_apples - that was a quick edit you did there on that swipe at BCG. It was also kinda sexist telling her to calm down and that it isn't all about her, but then again maybe you have just learned something, you have learned enough to not get banned.

We should all really know better by now than to engage you at all in this forum. By engaging you we end up making the threads in this forum about you, and about educating you and that's not what we are here for. Anyone with a real interest in the subject does more listening to us discuss issues about us than hijacking.

---

This was not originally in the feminist forum. It was a discussion of male behavior in the body and soul forum. Generally, in an online discussion forum, people often share their opinions, especially in a generally public forum like body and soul. And on a thread which is about male sexual behavior and thought-patterns, it might even be interesting to read what male posters think. On two other Canadian left forums, I read, and here I read and post. How that division happened is kinda random.

If I want to learn properly, I'll go read some books and journal articles, as I have, or review some archived threads, as I have, or speak to real-life people and workers, as I have, and maybe financially and visibly contribute to awareness, as I have; and even continue to do these things, as I will.

quote:

---

Originally posted by 1234567:
Here's what's in the mind of a rapist.
"She is there, she turns me on, I will have her, she is weaker than me so I will take her, she is mine for the moment, I don't care who she is, how old she is, what her earning power is. I just want her and because I am bigger and stronger I can and will have her"

---

Yes, sadly that is it in a nutshell.

A really terrific example of the mindset occured recently with my daughter.

Having recently split with her partner of 8 years, she was at a schools reunion where some friends of her ex-partners were attending. They were making all sorts of inappropriate remarks about her now being single and they are happy that she is on the "market" again. One after being re-buffed by her several times already, grabbed her by the hair as she walked passed and pulled her up to him, by the hair of course, and stated: "I can hardly wait to make you mine, I have wanted you for years".

Not sure what to do - I'll reply anyway. 500 - start a new thread if you want to reply to this, on the topic of statistics.

quote:

---

That's a nice idealistic perspecttive, however, it's not very practical. Most scientific conclusions these days are based on a combination of mechanisms and correlations. For example, smoking and lung cancer. There's a correlation, and there's a mechanism, and at some point the scientific authorities and the public decided a reasonable degree of confidence had been reached. Just as in this study, there is a correlation and a mechanism. Ultimately, things like mechanisms, motives and such are never enough to prove a claim on their own as they're written up and conjured theoretically. Theory always works - in theory. In practice, people expect numbers to back them up. If, hypothetically, you saw a study which drew a strong correlation between how much milk men drink and how many daughters they have, would you say "correlations are irrelevent!!!" or would you find that kind of interesting, and wonder what's going on?

Secondly, and this is a thread drift, I disagree with your last sentence. I don't think we should put vast amounts off knowledge as being off-limits because someone somewhere might make a harmful conclusion.

---

What would I say ? I would say 'Correlations are irrelevant'.

As I said, nobody should publish these things for wide consumption. There's no good reason for it. Research scientists should go to the academic community for their information, not the Toronto Sun.

I didn't say that we should put this 'off limits'. There's a difference.

As people have mentioned, there is a lot missing from what is presented. The conclusion is that more net access deters rape, but we can't say whether it is online porn as opposed to anything else online that is leading to the deduction without any objective evidence to support it, nor of course can we say with certainty that net access is the cause.

My intuition would be roughly the opposite of the data presented in the Slate piece, so I find this data interesting. If there is more porn than ever before then there may be an increase in sexual assaults. Mainstream heterosexual porn of the type that dominates what is available on the internet objectifies women and in some instances trivializes their very humanity. I would posit that increased distribution of such material could increase sexual assault, as well as any other behaviours that objectify women.

If someone asked me to hypothesize on what I would expect to happen, I wouldn't say there is anything about the internet that would lead to a decrease in sexual assault, any more than I would say that an increase in net access has decreased other anti-feminist or anti-woman behaviours, for example the constant harangue of online feminist spaces by people who are threatened by them (I may be new, but it doesn't take much lurking to see that this board is no exception). Nothing about the spread of the net as far as I can tell has fundamentally challenged patriarchy -which in my opinion will be necessary to completely eradicate all forms of sexism against women, from the comparatively small yet pervasive forms such as the trolling of feminist spaces, to those that threaten our bodily and mental integrity and indeed our very survival, such as sexual assault.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Michelle:

Hi. Stay out of the feminism forum from now on. You clearly have nothing constructive to add to this discussion.

---

Things like rape statistics and false reporting of rape are two serious issues that should be discussed. I still stand by the idea that 50% seems much to high and many studies show that 25% might be too high. I have read the link that was posted earlier. Do accuracy a favor and read the links I have posted.

It saddens me that I was asked to leave so quickly without even being given the benefit of the doubt. I thought open honest discussion was a value all liberals shared? Perhaps I was wrong.

[ 17 August 2007: Message edited by: Solid_Choke ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by Solid_Choke:
Just because we are feminists doesn't mean that we can exaggerate stats to make our case better. The issue of rape is bad enough as it is. We don't need to mislead people to make them see things our way.

---

Wonder what the "we feminists" is in the xyness of his reality?

I know, I know, he was asked to stay out of the feminist forum, but this again goees to males who say they are "feminists" or progressive and then commence to tell women how it is,or isn't, especially in regards to sexual assault and rape.

I think the study doesn't take into account that victims and potential victims of rape are also exposed to the internet. Exposure to information, the realization that the rapist is not as often the stranger behind the bushes as it is a friend or aquaintence, has enabled women to be more proactive in protecting themselves. I'm not saying this explains all the apparent changes in the statistics, but it could explain some, and the study doesn't take this into account, at least not as it is reported in Slate.

The study also assumes that the rate of reporting of sexual assaults in relation to unreported sexual assaults has remained constant in spite of the advent of the internet. While I think this a very reasonable assumption, I could see scenarios where the internet may skew that relationship either way. Again, while it is a reasonable assumption that I'm willing to subscribe to, I would not just take it as empirical fact.

My own "gut" feeling is that the tighter controls we put on the definitions and statistics gathering, the smaller the observed effect. This happens quite often in such studies. Unfortunately, I don't have the guts of the study, nor the proper education to examine them properly.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Bacchus:
Because people, will overstate things for a particular 'agenda'. Im not saying thats happening here, but since we have seen it happen (certainly with mr Bush if no other example) that could account for the disbelief.

Plus no one wants to think bad of her or her group, race, gender, orientation, country, religion, political ideology, etc

---

Bacchus, you switch from the inclusive use of "people" in your first paragraph to the exclusive use of "her" in the second. Which frames it as; women/grrls do not want to think bad of their "group, race, gender, orientation, country, religion, political ideology, etc" and excludes males from this.

Now, that makes a male biased conjecture, as it is men, apparently, who have the issues with what they perceive as elevated rape or sexual assault numbers, while women feel the public numbers are short of the actual figures.

Unless of course you are stating that women do not want to believe other women are lying about being raped.

I don't see how porn would reduce either incidence. The man in the alley gets off on power and violence. The date rapist sees an opportunity and takes it because he can. Is either of these men less likely to rape because he jacked off this morning? If so, why? Because he needs sex less because he already released? I feel that this reasoning is based on the stereotype that men cannot control themselves when it comes to sex.

That was supposed to be his or her not her or her

Its a bit of a reach to think a obvious typo is a bald statement of the sort you state.