I think the study attempted to find out worthwhile information. But it's bad form to insert your biases into the survey questions. Defining "force" as being given alcohol or drugs? Or doing what he asked because he was older than you? That's messed up and just might instill a frame of mind in the subject that damages the usefulness of the survey.
LB Parker wrote:
Note that the survey is specifically about intercourse with males. So apparently no "forcing", even by their loose definition, ever takes place by other females?
Just another "men are evil and we're going to skew the data to prove it" survey.
Ralphe wrote:
It really boils down to your, or the respondents, definition of force. Without that being stated in advance there is nothing to be learned here. But a good source for headlines; which I think was the only motive for it being published in the first place.
Andy Freeman wrote:
One of the definitions of "force" was "If you don't put out, I won't go out with you."
One person who thought that such "force" was rape described a person who would use it as an asshole.
In short, he thought that we need legislation so to keep folks from being dumped by assholes....
cthulhu wrote:
Like her or hate her, Camille Paglia has far-and-away the most sensible position on this stuff - one of the reasons she's such a thorn in the side of the "gender feminists" (the liberal philosopher Christina Hoff Sommers' term).
Mike Gerson wrote:
ctulhu,
I do question Camille Paglia's thinking. She did fall head over heels in love with Sarah Palin with very little information to back that up. Now that we have seen Palin's interview with Couric, shouldn't Paglia revise her opinion? I doubt it.
Rod Dreher, a former big supporter of Palin, says this about Palin:
I find it hard to understand how she was immediately seen (here at this blog for example) as such a great choice. Don't take my word for it, I know you won't, watch the whole interview. Anyway, the point is, Paglia is hard to read.
Bill Maron wrote:
Way to hijack a thread there Mike. BTW she didn't say FDR was on TV in '29 so she's MILES ahead of Gaffe Biden.
But getting BACK to the post. College campuses have redefined sexual activity to the point where any activity between "consenting adults" can be harassment or assault so some can use it as a club. I remember when "sex as a weapon" meant something else entirely.
Zoe Brain wrote:
"Have sex with me or I'll leave you" - persuasion
"Have sex with me or I'll fire you" - coercion
"Have sex with me or I'll kill your daughter" - rape
There are gradations. And differences of degree so marked that they differ in kind.
Leave a comment
Note: The comment system is functional, but timing out when returning a response page. If you have submitted a comment, DON'T RESUBMIT IT IF/WHEN IT HANGS UP AND GIVES YOU A "500" PAGE. Simply click your browser "Back" button to the post page, and then refresh to see your comment.
About this Entry
This page contains a single entry by Rand Simberg published on September 25, 2008 8:41 AM.
I think the study attempted to find out worthwhile information. But it's bad form to insert your biases into the survey questions. Defining "force" as being given alcohol or drugs? Or doing what he asked because he was older than you? That's messed up and just might instill a frame of mind in the subject that damages the usefulness of the survey.
Note that the survey is specifically about intercourse with males. So apparently no "forcing", even by their loose definition, ever takes place by other females?
Just another "men are evil and we're going to skew the data to prove it" survey.
It really boils down to your, or the respondents, definition of force. Without that being stated in advance there is nothing to be learned here. But a good source for headlines; which I think was the only motive for it being published in the first place.
One of the definitions of "force" was "If you don't put out, I won't go out with you."
One person who thought that such "force" was rape described a person who would use it as an asshole.
In short, he thought that we need legislation so to keep folks from being dumped by assholes....
Like her or hate her, Camille Paglia has far-and-away the most sensible position on this stuff - one of the reasons she's such a thorn in the side of the "gender feminists" (the liberal philosopher Christina Hoff Sommers' term).
ctulhu,
I do question Camille Paglia's thinking. She did fall head over heels in love with Sarah Palin with very little information to back that up. Now that we have seen Palin's interview with Couric, shouldn't Paglia revise her opinion? I doubt it.
Rod Dreher, a former big supporter of Palin, says this about Palin:
http://blog.beliefnet.com/crunchycon/2008/09/palin-debacle-on-cbs-evening-n.html
I find it hard to understand how she was immediately seen (here at this blog for example) as such a great choice. Don't take my word for it, I know you won't, watch the whole interview. Anyway, the point is, Paglia is hard to read.
Way to hijack a thread there Mike. BTW she didn't say FDR was on TV in '29 so she's MILES ahead of Gaffe Biden.
But getting BACK to the post. College campuses have redefined sexual activity to the point where any activity between "consenting adults" can be harassment or assault so some can use it as a club. I remember when "sex as a weapon" meant something else entirely.
"Have sex with me or I'll leave you" - persuasion
"Have sex with me or I'll fire you" - coercion
"Have sex with me or I'll kill your daughter" - rape
There are gradations. And differences of degree so marked that they differ in kind.