Rape

1 in 3 Men Would Commit Rape, and Other Exaggerated Headlines

Moving beyond the headlines and examining the study itself reveals that the actual claim is much, much weaker.

|

Thinker
Dan McKay / Flickr

A new study of male college student's attitudes about rape has set off alarm bells. Have you seen the headlines? "Nearly One-Third of College Men in Study Say They Would Commit Rape," advised The Huffington Post's Tyler Kingkade.  "1 in 3 College Men Admit They Would Rape, If We Don't Call It 'Rape,'" warned Jezebel's Ann Merlan. 

One-third of male students would be willing to commit rape? That may sound frightening, but moving beyond the headlines and examining the study itself reveals that the actual claim is much, much weaker.

Let's take a look. Here's the section on the study's methodology:

Eighty-six male college students received extra credit for their participation. All participants were over 18 (M = 21,SD = 3.6) and most were juniors in college. The overwhelming majority of participants ( > 90%) identified as Caucasian, consistent with the general student make up at this university, and all identified as heterosexual, with prior sexual experiences.

Emphasis added to point out that that was the whole study. That's it: just 86 people at a single campus, the University of North Dakota. Actually, the final tally included even fewer participants, since researchers excluded incomplete survey results and tossed out one response that confused them. At the end of the day, the study considered the statements of just 73 guys.

And a third of them confessed their willingness to commit rape? Not exactly. Some 32 percent (i.e., just 20-odd people) said they would force a woman to have sex with them if they knew they would get away with it. Many of those same respondents didn't actually think this constituted rape, which might speak to the fact that men are poorly educated about what rape entailsโ€”but it's hard to say for sure, since we're actually talking about very, very few guys here.

So a small number of confused men in an unrepresentative survey of a single campus said that under fantastical conditions they would do something very bad. Are these findings worrisome, even if they don't ultimately say much? The Washington Examiner's Ashe Schow writes that we shouldn't panic:

Cosmo brings up an interesting point, surely unintentionally raising a question that is more ancient than universities themselves and appears in Plato's Republic. How many people would break any law if they knew they could get away with it? How many seemingly just people could you get to say they would steal or even murder if there was no chance of being caught โ€” if they were given a ring that made them invisible?

Which brings up another problem with the study: Saying you would do something bad if there are no consequences is not the same as doing those bad things. How many people say they'd love to tell off their boss but never do?

Schow concludes that perhaps the handful of respondents who indicated they would commit sexual assault under extremely hypothetical conditions, "didn't take the survey too seriously." I'm not convinced anyone else should, either.

NEXT: Boko Haram Attacks in Cameroon, Atrocities Deserve More Attention, from Nigerian Government, West Africa, Islamic Leaders

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. “Nearly One-Third of College Men in Study Say The Would Commit Rape,”

    It’s sad to find out that after all the years I spent in college, I didn’t get with the program.

  2. 1 in 3 College Men Admit They Would Rape, If We Don’t Call It ‘Rape,’

    Uh huh.

    1. Okay, quick poll. Of the males here, who would commit rape if they didn’t call it rape? I’m one vote for WOULDN’T FUCKING DO IT. Anyone voting differently?

      1. ProL, what are you doing?!? Warty reads this site! So does STEVE SMITH!

        1. That’s two votes, which I’ve already pretallied.

          1. STEVE SMITH NO POSEUR!

            WHEN HIM RAPE, HIM CALL IT RAPE!

            LEAVE NO QUESTION IN ANYONES MIND!

      2. Well, if you are actually taking about “forced sex,” of course I wouldn’t.

        But if you are talking about giving women a regrettable sexual experience, I’m already guilty of multiple offenses. ๐Ÿ™

        1. My mom still complains about that night. Thanks a lot.

          1. Look, even I didn’t know I could pee with an erection.

            1. At least the lubed up midget Sugarfree keeps chained to the radiator during sex play left with a smile on his face.

            2. Oh please, you proved that that night we spent in Tijuana. Or don’t you remember?

              1. On advice of counsel, I categorically deny that I have ever been to Mexico.

                1. “Nor am I aware, in any sense, of the existence of a place allegedly called Mexico, nor do I acknowledge that it is physically possible for me to move from this very spot to any other, being a firm adherent of Parmenides of Elea.”

                2. Tijuana, Ontario, idiot.

                  1. You can’t even go to Canada. Even the Canadians don’t want you in their country.

                    1. Well, not any more…

        2. Stop using the clown suit, then.

          1. He can’t even get all the blood out after multiple washings.

        3. Despite what Jezebel may feel, in its collectively feeling way, “rape” is a pretty carefully defined term. See, you can lock someone up for many, many years for rape. Unless you’re Mike Tyson, then three years is enough.

        4. How else am I supposed to get any?

      3. Are we talking about rape rape?

        1. Yes. It’s only rape if you do it twice.

          1. They never let me, so I guess I’m OK then.

        2. “You said ‘rape’ twice”.

          1. He likes rape.

            (Why do I get the feeling that if they tried to remake that movie again today, of all the jokes people would complain about, that one would get the most complaints?)

        3. Rape rape is nonconsensual snu snu?

          1. The spirit is willing, but the flesh is spongy and bruised.

      4. Well, if it was for the purpose of increasing my orphan workers tear production, then of course I would.

        But adult women tears are worth like, nothing. They’re too easy to acquire- all you need to do is to pop in a Lifetime movie.*

        *Women of reason, you know I love you. Look, here’s a picture of a handsome fellow to prove it: http://2.bp.blogspot.com/-UZn1…..+doyle.jpg

        1. Just post pictures of Nick Offerman and you’ll never go wrong.

          1. Dat Bass!

            1. 1 out of 1 Kaptious Kristens would rape Nick Offerman if given the chance.

              1. 1 out of 1 Kaptious Kristens would rape give Nick Offerman some strange if given the chance.

                Fixed that for you. To be rape it has to be non consensual and I get the feeling that Nick isn’t the kind of guy who would protest a gratuitous fling.

        2. (the first time – and so far only – time I’ve cried in front of the squeeze is when the horsey died in the True Grit remake)

          1. My daughter decided to name her stuffed horse “Little Blackie” after she saw the first part of the movie.

            Bad call.

          2. Um… He died in the old one too.

            1. Never seen the old one

              1. You’re dead to me!

                1. John Wayne is every bit the great actor that Kevin Costner and Bill Paxton are.

                  1. Ow. Harsh.

                  2. I never got why John Wayne was supposed to be any good.

                  3. DEAD!

                  4. I think you mean Bill Pullman.

                    1. I think you mean Bill Pullman.

                      Him too, but Bill Paxton is way worse. I mean, Twister??

                    2. Twister is totally made up for by Navy SEALS

      5. Yeah, pretty much. You know, I just must live an incredibly sheltered existence. I’ve never met any guys who think rape is okay.

        1. YOU MEET STEVE SMITH SOMEDAY, THEN YOU MEET ONE.

          1. A day your anus will never forget.

      6. I have never in my life, even when in foreign lands with considerable power over others and could have easily gotten away with it, touched a woman without her requesting me to do so.

        Does that answer your question?

      7. To paraphrase Penn, I’ve raped all the women I’ve wanted to.

        Which is none.

  3. “And a third of them confessed their willingness to commit rape? Not exactly. Some 32 percent (i.e., just 20-odd people) said they would force a woman to have sex with them if they knew they would get away with it. Many of those same respondents didn’t actually think this constituted rape, which might speak to the fact that men are poorly educated about what rape entails?but it’s hard to say for sure, since we’re actually talking about very, very few guys here.”

    Also, let’s say you’re a 21 year old college guy. Some pencil necked geek comes up to you with a clipboard and says ‘Hey would you commit rape?’

    I imagine an awful lot of men would be laughing around the beer pong table later that night about the answer they gave to that fucking question.

    1. This “rape culture” nonsense is so obviously bullshit that it amazes me that anyone, even the political bulletheads, try to act like it really exists. Except in the large Satan-worshiping groups that exist in this country.

      1. I think it depends on what is meant by the term.

        If it’s only referring to the fact that we used to have some really awful laws and attitudes regarding rape and all of that hasn’t been turned around yet, though it’s certainly gotten much better, then I think that’s not crazy. Unfortunately, that’s got way to many characters for Twitter and doesn’t fit on a bumper sticker, so we’re stuck with the goofy idea that this culture is a-ok with rape.

        1. The idea that our colleges are rape factories is absurd. I’m not saying no one commits rape.

          1. Of course you’re saying that. In fact, you’re saying that men can do as they will with women when and where they want.

            /proggie-strawman

          2. I think most reliable studies show rape has declined overall and is less likely at campuses than other places, so yeah, that idea doesn’t hold water. But I think there’s some history, some it recent, that some of our institutions don’t take rape as seriously as they probably should. Some of those cases happen in colleges. Here’s Rand Paul describing that in our military:

            http://www.paul.senate.gov/?p=news&id=1028

    2. “Would you rape a woman if you knew you’d get away with it?”

      “Brah, totally! It’s sex…with a woman. What am I? GAY?”

  4. I think I can at least safely conclude that 20-odd students at UND are complete a$$holes.

    1. As I suggest below, not necessarily. I’m pretty sure someone could get you to respond to a survey question with a response that would make it look like you believe using little children for skeet shooting practice is awesome.

      1. So we don’t even know what the wording was?!

        I take it back then.

      2. ^^This…

        They were offered extra-credit?

        In what? That indicates to me that they were all in one class, perhaps it was a Women’s Study course, or maybe “PUA 101”?

        Something tells me there was absolutely no scientific controls on this “study”.

    2. Dude what can you expect from some jackasses who try to have a mascot called the Fighting Sioux!!!!

      The outrage factor is already off the charts due to their cultural appropriation of native americans. It should be no surprise that they are also rapists.

  5. “How many seemingly just people could you get to say they would steal or even murder if there was no chance of being caught ? if they were given a ring that made them invisible?”

    Hey, I’d throw the ring back into the fire in which it was forged. After checking out the girls’ locker room, of course.

    1. Hold on there, buddy.

  6. If I could control flocks of Vultures with my mind, i would have them follow Anna Merlan wherever she goes, and shit on her every day for the rest of her life.

    MIND CRIME!?!? WHAT HAVE I DONE. SOMEONE CALL GAWKER

  7. How carefully they must have searched to find some tarded-up dudebros that don’t know the definition of rape.

    And what Irish said.

    1. Wait, are you saying that this sociology study was…*gasp*…designed to create predetermined outcomes? I’ve never heard of such a thing!

      1. Remember that European sociologist who had like a decades worth of papers withdrawn because he was falsifying data?

        My favorite one of his was the claim that litter makes people behave more racist. That’s such a wonderful prog conclusion that you knew it had to be fake.

        1. litter makes people behave more racist

          No wonder my cats hate black people.

          To be fair, they hate all other people too.

          1. My second dog was a stray that I picked up from a shelter when he was 9 months old.

            That dog hated black people. He would throw himself at the TV screen if a black man was filling it; he would bark and show his teeth at any black man who walked onto our property and could not be calmed down.

            It was really, really embarrassing, because he was otherwise a big baby who wanted nothing but to be cuddled and loved. He was terrified of cats because the first cat encounter he had went horribly wrong: he ran up to make friends with this cute looking hissing and spitting creature, and was shocked when it slashed his nose instead of playing with him.

    2. Or, like I said, they use some vaguely worded questions that could be answered innocently and interpreted as supporting rape.

  8. This will be an Obama administration talking point within another news cycle.

    “As it’s been proven, one third of men can’t wait to rape women. That’s unacceptable. That proves we need more money for Head Start and free community college.”

    1. “There are some who say it’s ok to rape, as long as we call it something else. That individual desires are more important than the needs of the community. I disagree.”

  9. tossed out one response that confused them

    Sugarfree or Warty?

    1. Much like a mighty bull, Warty is colorblind and the red cape has no effect on him.

    2. Yeah, what is confusing about the fact that for some reason all the pages were stuck together? Especially the ‘hot’ pages that had situational questions about rape on them.

  10. I doubt that 1/3 of UND male students over 18 (M = 21,SD = 3.6) have read Plato, but Socrates had a inquiry on this topic with Glaucon regarding a certain Ring of Gyges that was far more profound than this idiotic survey.

    1. I should RTFA before commenting.

      1. Why? The articles suck, the comments are why we’re here.

        1. I skim the articles for context until my eyes glaze over, then I’m just enough out of it to visit the comments.

        2. “The articles suck, the comments are why we’re here.”

          I have used the comments to get individuals to look into Reason.

          1. The articles are like a ramp for all the good skateboard tricks.

            1. Anyone who would read this place on a regular basis and even find the time to comment is clearly a masochist.

              Soave and his fellow writers are the sadists.

          2. Except that they’re why Virginia Postrel hates us.

            ๐Ÿ™ – My face when I think of Virginia Postrel’s disdain.

            1. She needs to grow a skin.

              1. A third of us think it would be OK to rape her?

  11. Look, Robby, you didn’t go to journalism school at Columbia for 10 months, so of course you don’t know how to infer general trends from a sample of 73 college students in North Dakota. Best to let those who have a clear track record of working bullshit detectors handle this, thanks.

  12. How many college girls would use the law to fuck with ex-boyfriends if they thought they could get away with it?

    1. You mean with (false) rape accusations?

  13. Honestly, I looked at the study and couldn’t find any of the questions. At this point, given that the author is with N. Dakota’s Counseling Psychology and Community Services department, I’m going to say I simply don’t trust the study. It’s easy enough to include vaguely worded questions that can be interpreted to give specifically intended responses.

    1. I think I worked it out – the author says that she used the last question in the Malamuth survey. I’ve quoted that one downthread.

  14. Maybe they thought they would get better grades if they confess to being potential rapists?

    1. Well, they got *credit* at least

      Also = American Presidents Also Shown to be Mind-Rape-Prone

      Quick informal survey of reason commenters =

      “How many women have you slept with that have at some point told you *(just randomly!) that they sometimes had ‘rape-fantasies’ while masturbating”

      my experience is = somewhere between 10-20% *like to tell people about it*. who knows what an anonymous survey would yield.

      1. I have some definitional problems with the idea of “rape fantasy.” If you are desirious of being taken against your will, aren’t you really consenting to the sex?

        I think most women are really revealing a desire for power games and rough sex.

        1. “I think most women are really revealing a desire for power games and rough sex.”

          Yes, i know.

          hence the subtle way they get you to ‘pull hair’ etc. without ever actually *asking you to*

          My point was more that, “if you really want to gin up some Headline Generating Bullshit-Data” = there’s a goldmine there.

        2. I think that is probably true.

          Which is another huge problem with the affirmative consent stuff. A lot of women don’t want a sensitive guy asking “can I do this?” every 2 minutes. They want to be taken roughly by a manly man who knows what he is after.

  15. Well, I would rape if I could get away with it. Damn straight.

    1. *raises eyebrow*

      1. Oh, come on. Dressed like that? He was asking for it.

        http://www.freyapress.co.uk/wp…..o1_500.jpg

        1. Wouldn’t you rather have a straight guy? I am not sure you have the right equipment to get him…uh…prepared….to be raped.

          1. Oh, wait. I get it. You are raping him straight?

    2. Go on…

  16. 1 in 3 Men Would Commit Rape

    Is it still rape if it’s finger-banging?

  17. The headlines may be overblown, and yes it is a small sample size. So I wouldn’t hit the panic button. But to say

    Some 32 percent (i.e., just 20-odd people) said they would force a woman to have sex with them if they knew they would get away with it. Many of those same respondents didn’t actually think this constituted rape, which might speak to the fact that men are poorly educated about what rape entails

    is pretty weak. We want people to have a basic moral compass that points away from forcing others to do their bidding, regardless of whether they’ll be caught for doing it.

    Don’t let skepticism of the campus rape scare prevent you from admitting a troubling result, even if there are caveats attached.

      1. He did go to UM, right? I can understand how that would set someone back a few years.

    1. Don’t let skepticism of the campus rape scare prevent you from admitting a troubling result, even if there are caveats attached.

      The problem is that it’s also a wildly counter-intuitive result. With only vague references to the underlying data provided (the paper doesn’t reference the actual questions). In a world of highly politicized social science, I think some measure of skepticism is more than called for.

      1. One of the worst aspects of the SJW scum and their politicization of issues is that they have shown, repeatedly, that they are more than willing to lie, obfuscate, and be endlessly dishonest. This makes talking about a subject that they’ve decided to obsess over extremely difficult, because their very presence introduces the possibility that anything used as “evidence” may be a distortion or even fabricated. Their presence is truly negative and ultimately often negatively effects the people they are supposed to want to help.

        Because it’s actually all about them and who they hate.

        1. One of the worst aspects of the SJW scum and their politicization of issues is that they have shown, repeatedly, that they are more than willing to lie, obfuscate, and be endlessly dishonest.

          Yeah, and it always irritates me when they use unscrupulous means to complain about…unscrupulous behavior. Apparently principles are for the little people.

      2. They seem to be using pre-existing surveys, or at least wording similar to pre-existing surveys, but those surveys are behind a paywall. This paper states

        This scale measures self-reported likelihood to engage in a variety of sexual behaviors ”if nobody would ever know and there wouldn’t be any consequences” for the participants. The behaviors that were included were heterosexual intercourse, forcing a female to do something sexual she does not want to, and rape.

        which makes it sound like the questions were “Would you engage in [behavior] if nobody would ever know and there wouldn’t be any consequences”, though it is hard to tell for sure.

        It does some like really shoddy research to not give the exact questions. And, yeah, the questions could have been worded deceptively or in a way that led to a desired outcome, but it doesn’t sound like they were asking “Would you have sex with a drunk girl” and then calling it rape. It sounds like they were using some version of “Would you rape someone if you could get away with it.” That a size fraction of people, even if the sample size is small, would answer yes is still disturbing to me.

        1. People say weird things when you make caveats like “if there were no consequences”, which isn’t really a real world thing. That’s like asking if you would rape a unicorn if they existed. I mean, obviously I would, but since the question is meaningless since unicorns are extinct, my answer is meaningless too.

          This is why “social science” studies are invariably total and absolute shit that should pretty much be completely ignored. Except ones about unicorns.

          1. You just want to absorb their power, you bastard.

            1. I’ll crush you all with my unicorn power!

              1. Ooohhhhh he’s shitting a double rainbow! What does it mean?

          2. They also failed to take into account the folks that interpret no consequences meaning literally no consequences. If there is no harm physical, mental, or emotional to anyone including the victim (a.k.a. the literal meaning of no consequences) rape becomes a lot less bad.

            1. Yeah, it’s kind of like saying “if you had a holodeck and could have any fantasy you wanted in it with holographic women, would you do some forced stuff?” Well, if you say yes, who cares? There’s no one actually being hurt in any way, except possibly Lt. Barkley.

            2. That is a good point that I hadn’t considered.

              1. But see J Mann’s post below with what are probably the actual questions. They don’t seem to imply a holodeck scenario.

          3. Other criticisms about this particular study aside, I think even an unrealistic hypothetical provides some insight. Consider this example: I would like to *think* that if I was in the offices of Charlie Hebdo, that I would have thrown myself at one of the gunmen, tried to wrestle their rifle away and, if successful, shot the other gunman. It’s obviously absurd, since I’ll almost certainly never find myself in that situation, and even if I did, there is a good chance that my intentions would amount to jack shit when the bullets actually started flying, but it says something about how the type of person I *want* to be. Similarly, I suspect most of the guys in this survey would not go through with a rape if actually presented with the opportunity to do so, consequence free. But it still speaks to their attitudes towards another person’s agency and the use of force. Robby’s response comes off to me as an apologia for a shitty moral compass, which is the wrong response.

            1. I would posit that this study is too flawed and shitty to actually draw any conclusions of any kind about any of its participants. If you can’t draw conclusions about what the study was purporting to test, how can you draw conclusions about anything else from it if its methodology is that flawed?

              1. Yeah, maybe. I was reacting to Robby’s argument, not the actual study, but maybe it’s a moot point.

          4. This is true. “If there were no consequences” is a completely fantastic situation. Might as well say “what if you could have any superpower?”.

            Lots of people say they would do bad stuff if they could turn invisible, for example. That doesn’t mean that they are any more likely to do bad stuff in reality.

            1. The correct answer is always flight.

              1. Excrete baby oil from my pores on command

              2. I’d go with complete omnipotence. But that might be cheating.

              3. I’d go with powerful telekinesis,that would include the ability to essentially fly, super strength, you could set up shields, etc. , plus stand around looking all unconcerned with your hands in the pockets of your leather coat while flinging cars and lamp posts at people with your mind ๐Ÿ˜‰

        2. If that were true, it would be disturbing to me, as well.

          Here’s the thing, though. In my 43 years, I’ve never met anyone who was actually okay with rape. As I said above, maybe I just live this incredibly sheltered existence. But, I really don’t think so.

          This outcome isn’t just disturbing. It’s also genuinely bizarre. Honestly, it’s a lot easier for me to believe that the study was fundamentally dishonest, particularly given that the questions aren’t cited, than to believe that my own observation is some sort of outlier.

    2. When first reading I would have agreed with you, but on thinking about it, the author is right. That percentage is meaningless without a control question to show what else people would do if there was no consequences. They should have included a would you cheat on a test question to demonstrate if this response is out of the ordinary or not.

  18. all identified … with prior sexual experiences.

    That, right there, makes me want to call bullshit on everything they said.

    1. all identified … with prior sexual experiences

      STEVE SMITH SPEND SUMMER ON CAMPUS. EVERYONE NOW HAVE PRIOR SEXUAL EXPERIENCE… AND NIGHTMARES.

  19. NEW STUDY FINDS MEN WOULD KILL PEOPLE THEY HATE IF THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH IT.

    NEW STUDY FINDS MEN WOULD SLEEP WITH THEIR BEST FRIEND’S HOT DAUGHTER IF THEY THOUGH THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH IT.

    NEW STUDY FINDS THAT MEN ARE JUST HORRIBLE, NO-ONE SURPRISED.

    1. You raise an interesting point

      (*strokes beard)

      No = shouldn’t robbys point be that its not the “headlines” that are exaggerated…?

      …so much as the ‘meta-process’ by which progressive journos gin-up their current rape-narratives? Its the *underlying story* that’s exaggerated = not just the headline. The headlines are by contrast, ‘factual’.

      These “1-in-Low Single Digit #” data-points are the desired end goal = and so they utilize whatever methodology needed to get them, then highlight those results

      (*often *while* offering caveats that ‘these studies lack certain rigor’, yet help offer *insights*… because, you know = Party of science, and all)

      The fact that these media are so quick to offer a new story up in the RAPEKULTURKAMPF, right after the ‘Tawana Of Our Age’-event, is a telling shift in tactics = Stop Relying On Actual Facts – make ‘rape’ into an ubiquitous presence in the minds of all men…

    2. NEW STUDY FINDS PROGRESSIVES WOULD SUPPORT POLITICAL CLEANSING IF THEY THOUGHT THEY COULD GET AWAY WITH IT.

      1. That is not a new study.

        That is an old mathmatical proof.

  20. I LITERALLY feel like I’ve been [rape by another name]ed after reading these comments.

    1. [rape by another name]ed

      I don’t care what they say, it’s just not the same.

    2. I LITERALLY feel like I’ve been [rape by another name]ed

      Jostled?

      1. Struggle Snuggled ๐Ÿ™‚

  21. They should have waited for spring to get some really horrifying results. All this tells me is that there are some serious pervs/bad asses at UND who would be willing to whip out their rape stick in -15F weather.

    In the Spring a young man’s fancy lightly turns to thoughts of love.

    If they would have asked this question in April after these guys had just walked across a campus where the gals were just emerging from 6 months of wearing nothing except parkas and long johns, the percentage would have been north of 85% easy.

    1. I think that they do actually have insulated buildings and central heating in North Dakota now.

      1. No that is East Grand Forks that you are thinking of. That is in Minnesoda where we have civilization.

        Fucking Grand Forks, ND is worse than Bum Fuck Egypt. They got nothing. Except a bunch of rapists. How do you think the Buffalo herds were really exterminated?

      2. I think I was also making more of a point of how wonderful spring is in somewhere like Grand Forks.

        Here is a good treatise on the subject:
        http://www.theonion.com/articl…..ing,20014/

        Milchan went on to explain that in northern climes, the ebb and flow of the seasons creates a corresponding ebb and flow of breast visibility. At the University of Wisconsin and other northern universities possessing lengthy winters and a left-leaning, socially liberal student body, the recent preponderance of breast displays has brought student traffic to near-gridlock, with heterosexual males and both closeted and out lesbians gawking at the near-unbelievable levels of mammarian visibility.

        1. As I live somewhere with a pretty good winter, I have noted and appreciated that phenomenon as well.

  22. I read somewhere that rape fantasies among women is fairly common (30% to 40% is what I recall)

  23. I think I’ve got the questions they used. According to the linked study, Edwards et al used the last questions in the Malamuth sexual aggression scale (published 1989).

    That question is:

    “If you could be assured that no one would know and that you could in no way be punished for engaging in the following acts, how likely, if at all, would you be to commit such acts?”

    Participants then rate, from 1 (not at all likely) to 5 (very likely) the following acts: anal intercourse; group sex; homosexuality; bondage; whipping, spanking; rape; forcing a female to do something she didn’t want to do; transvestism; and pedophilia.

    I do wonder whether some participants imagine “force” as a consensual d/s scenario, or whether they really believe it’s possible to force someone without raping them.

    Another alternative might be that they think they would be likely to force people to do things they didn’t want to do in a non-sexual contect (for example, rob them), but that seems even more strained.

    1. If it is from 1989, it could be using the legal definition of rape at the time which for most states which was penetration. “Forcing a female to do something she didn’t want to do” definitely encompasses rape but not all of the possible sexual interactions under that umbrella were considered rape at the time.

      Interesting. Good find.

    2. But since rape is already on the list, doesn’t that sort of make you think that forcing a female to do something she didn’t want to do is something else and not rape?

      I’d be way more of a big old 1 on that question too, but I can see the confusion.

      “When I think of forcing a woman to do something, I would normally call that rape, but that is already listed so it must be something different. Like a dutch oven or something”

    3. good catch.

    4. If you could be assured that no one would know

      Would that include the victim in the case of rape? That would change things a bit too, I would think.

      The questions are completely fantastic, and that is enough to make the whole thing very questionable. It’s fantasy land. And people have weird fantasies.
      I think that we already knew that a lot of people respond to incentives and consequences. SO it is not surprising that when all consequences are removed, more people would do bad things.

    5. Rhetorical: What does “anal intercourse; group sex; homosexuality; bondage; whipping, spanking; and transvestism” have to do with sexual aggression? They are all consensual activities.

      This survey has some fucked up attitudes toward sex.

  24. This is why, although I am an atheist, other people’s religion doesn’t generally bother me. I’ve met enough people who say that they would do bad things if not for fear of punishment in the afterlife that I am glad such superstitions exist.
    This is kind of a corollary of that phenomenon. With complete lack of consequences, a lot of people lose their moral grounding.

    1. If people were inherently good, consequences would not be necessary.

    2. Again, interesting read:

      Lawrence Kohlberg’s stages of moral development

      Everything up to stage 4 depends morality to some extent being imposed externally.

      1. Yes, I am familiar with that. I’m just often surprised at how many people never get past level 2.

  25. We already know that a large majority of people would administer heavy electric shocks to a screaming subject when directed to do so by an authority figure (man in a lab coat).

    1. You call it the Milgram experiment = I call it a *ripoff*. I signed up to electrocute people!

  26. Rod Serling already covered this.

    Twilight Zone: Season 2, Episode 16 – A Penny for Your Thoughts

    Gaining telepathic abilities when his coin lands on its edge bank clerk Hector B. Poole learns about the difference between other people’s plans and fantasies.

    http://www.imdb.com/title/tt0734546/

  27. Let’s ask 100 people on the street whether they would rob a bank at gunpoint if they thought they’d get away with it. Or better yet: ask 100 students from your local college’s Women’s Studies Department whether they’d murder Republicans if they thought they’d get away with it. I daresay that in either case, the “yes” answers would well exceed 32%.

    1. “Number 2|1.13.15 @ 5:27PM|#

      Let’s ask 100 people on the street…”

      “What, do we look like “Social Science Monthly”? let’s just quote a flimsy paper by some batshit-crazy academics who want to fund a Department of Rape Studies, and call it good” /Newsweek

  28. 99.99% would steal a million dollars if they were guaranteed to get away with it.

  29. Thanks, Robby. Let us know when you’re called a rape apologist.

    How many women would kill their husbands or their new-borns if they thought they could get away with it? See: “Open Letter to Senate Judiciary on the VAWA” http://malemattersusa.wordpres…..-the-vawa/

    But the people who conducted or promoted this “study” will under no circumstances make women look bad. It’s all about pushing men down so women are left “up.”

    Such ideological feminist sites as Jezebel.com apparently seek gender divisiveness instead of harmony (all the while accusing men of that). Thus they’d never, ever recommend this:

    “The Sexual Harassment Quagmire: How To Dig Out” http://malemattersusa.wordpres…..-quagmire/

    It’s a detailed look at what I think is the sexes’ most alienating and destructive behavioral difference, which is responsible for much of what is called sexual assault of women.

  30. This is yet another paving stone of the road to Hell that radical feminists have been building for decades and that is now nearing completion.

    There is no “epidemic” of campus rape (it’s down 50% since the 1990s and 20% lower than for non-student women of the same age). There is no “rape culture” (a synonym for Patriarchy, in which all heterosexual sex is rape because of inherent power imbalances – i.e. “male privilege”). Men are not ogres and women are not innocent victims.

    Yet this is the mantra of the “rape culture” propagandists, who have now infiltrated the highest levels of federal government.

    For the backstory on the way the meme of “rape culture” was created from misandric feminist leadership and eventually insinuated into almost every facet of US society, including nearly every media story on the “epidemic” of campus sexual assault, see: All Sex is Rape ? All Men are Rapists: Patriarchy = Rape Culture

    For an in-depth expose of the evolution of universities from institutions of higher learning into witch-hunt tribunals for the “rape culture” advocates, see: New Puritanism ? New Paternalism: The “Rape Culture” Narrative Demeans Women, Demonizes Men, and Turns Universities into Witch Hunt Tribunals

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.