Our new Indie Games subforum is now open for business in G&T. Go and check it out, you might land a code for a free game. If you're developing an indie game and want to post about it, follow these directions. If you don't, he'll break your legs! Hahaha! Seriously though.
Our rules have been updated and given their own forum. Go and look at them! They are nice, and there may be new ones that you didn't know about! Hooray for rules! Hooray for The System! Hooray for Conforming!

Misogyny and Rape Culture on Campus

1246731

Posts

  • mrt144mrt144 King of the Numbernames Registered User regular
    Bethryn wrote: »
    Before getting into specifics, it would help if you could describe, in broad strokes, what kind of and how many examples you are looking for.
    I want to see what it is that the non-rapist is doing that is allowing the rapist to think he's okay with rape.

    For reference's sake, my current view is that the people who date-rape regularly work in a paedophile-ring like system. They self-reinforce the idea that it's okay to get a girl so drunk/drugged she can't resist and have sex with her. They are distinct from the majority of people, who don't view sexual conquest as an ends-justify-the-means important status marker, and generally view themselves as superior to that majority.

    That may be naive, but given the 75% (self-reported) rape rate among women, I - perhaps naively - have trouble assuming there's a 1-1 rate of women rape victims to male rapists, and the belief that 3 out of every 4 guys I met has raped a woman.

    Now those groups, that is what I think of when I think 'rape culture', because they are mini-versions of actual country-wide rape cultures where it's okay to rape women. I do not think that those groups receive significant indication from the majority that their attitude towards rape is okay, nor do I think that if they received negative indications of their attitude from outside (barring actual prosecution) would they give a rat's arse.

    I think that there is a strong possibility that a subset of males is responsible for the majority of rapes. But I also think there are a lot of men who genuinely don't view what they did as sexual assault, or if they took the time to internalize past actions, would feel horrible persistent guilt.

  • Fuzzy Cumulonimbus CloudFuzzy Cumulonimbus Cloud Registered User regular
    The cabal theory of rape doesn't really hold true.

    39kEWYh.jpg
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    The cabal theory of rape doesn't really hold true.
    Okay, so you have literature that demonstrates that rapists are across a broad spectrum of males, and not specific self-reinforcing circles?

    I'm not saying "paedophile-ring" like in the sense of evil, calculating groups who know what they're doing is wrong and take pleasure in it by the way; I'm simply referring to the fact that these guys are bouncing it off each other for acceptance, not getting feedback from society in general. Just for clarity's sake.

    To try and paint an example, on university campus there are pretty obviously divided groups. The guys who are trying constantly to be hypermasculine, have rooms full of pin-ups, and spend most of the time when out drinking trying to hit on people; pick-up artists etc.; these are the guys I'm thinking of when I say self-reinforcing groups.

    On the other hand, other groups - average dudes, nerdy dudes, guys who are just good at sports but not team players, arty dudes, etc., anyone who won't 'score' just to make sure they 'score'; I don't think they self-reinforce the concept of date-rape being okay, and I think they have the patience not to rape a girl because they think they deserve it. Not to say nobody from these groups commit rape, but rather than incidence rate is significantly lower.

    That's my opinion; if there's statistical evidence showing it's wrong please do present it.

    I already know rape is statistically similar across socio-economic and racial factors by the way, I don't need evidence of that.

    Bethryn on
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Bethryn wrote: »
    Before getting into specifics, it would help if you could describe, in broad strokes, what kind of and how many examples you are looking for.
    I want to see what it is that the non-rapist is doing that is allowing the rapist to think he's okay with rape.

    For reference's sake, my current view is that the people who date-rape regularly work in a paedophile-ring like system. They self-reinforce the idea that it's okay to get a girl so drunk/drugged she can't resist and have sex with her. They are distinct from the majority of people, who don't view sexual conquest as an ends-justify-the-means important status marker, and generally view themselves as superior to that majority.

    That may be naive, but given the 75% (self-reported) rape rate among women, I - perhaps naively - have trouble assuming there's a 1-1 rate of women rape victims to male rapists, and the belief that 3 out of every 4 guys I met has raped a woman.

    Now those groups, that is what I think of when I think 'rape culture', because they are mini-versions of actual country-wide rape cultures where it's okay to rape women. I do not think that those groups receive significant indication from the majority that their attitude towards rape is okay, nor do I think that if they received negative indications of their attitude from outside (barring actual prosecution) would they give a rat's arse.

    I'm curious, what has led you to believe that rapists work in this kind of system?

    I think this is the crux of our disagreement, here; the idea is that there doesn't need to be any kind of ring or subculture that self-reinforces. Those ideas are already floating around in our culture to varying degrees in various groups. The sense of entitlement, the idea that "she wants it" or "she's asking for it" or "she deserves it" or whatever other justifications a rapist might use, the confusion of consent and the unwillingness to believe or accept when a woman says no, these are not uncommon, nor are they abnormal. I mean, the thread we had earlier here on PA about men's magazines offering quotes indistinguishable from the things convicted rapists say is a good example - it's because convicted rapists aren't distinct from our culture, even our popular culture. They are a product of the misogyny that still exists in our culture, for whatever reason - their peer group, their family, etc.

    You mentioned, in your interpretation of what I saying, the claim that rapists exist because they are permitted or implicitly encouraged by non-rapists. You also said that rapists are obviously part of rape culture. Essentially, I don't think there is a hard line between the culture that produced a rapist and our culture at large. There are many, many rapists. As you say, it's highly unlikely that the large proportion of women who have been assaulted is 1-to-1 with men who commit assaults; I would suggest that the portion of men who have committed assaults have a pattern of repeated sexual assault with multiple victims, because it is simply their mode of sexual behaviour. But the ideas that lead to those patterns aren't particularly abnormal or aberrant - they are common, they are well-disseminated, and they are very familiar.

    edit: based on your post above, I would re-emphasize that I believe the group of self-reinforcing, rape-permissive or even rape-encouraging individuals is larger and more widespread than you are depicting. You see frat boys and jocks who drug women and assault them; sure, that's a common one, but every subgroup and subculture has its misogyny that leads to resentment and entitlement. We're all familiar with the kind of nerds, for example, who resent women and think they are entitled to sex because they've been such "nice guys," who express terrible sexism out of frustration and self-loathing; that attitude is no better than the stereotypical drink-spiking frat boy.

    Evil Multifarious on
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • EWomEWom Registered User regular
    The University of Montana is struggling with rape and sexual assaults. Recently there have been numerous reports of University officials failing to provide a safe environment for co-eds, and treating rape and sexual assault allegations with the severity needed. Often times being accused of covering "it" up, or just outright ignoring the cases. The most recent, which has caused the most backlash, was a Saudi national, studying at the UofM, who assaulted one girl, and raped another. When the University officials heard of this (after both girls went to campus police to report it),one of the UM officials sent an e-mail to the student in question, telling him that the police would be coming, giving him ample time to flee the country back to Saudi Arabia. In addition there have been several reports of athletes from this school (primarily football players), who've been protected by the UM officials after sexual assault/rape allegations.

    If this is how the people responsible for the wellbeing of thousands of teenagers and 20 somethings handle rape and sexual assault, how can one not see that it is possible for guys to think it's "no big deal", etc. Now read this part carefully: I am not saying rape and sexual assault is ok, or understandable in any way. I'm simply saying, if you as a student, see that the UM will protect you after you rape someone, why SOME would think it's not that bad.

    Recently the mayor and police chief of Missoula ( the city in which the UofM is in ) had a press conference telling UM students that if they are sexually assualted, raped, etc, DO NOT go to the UM officials, go directly to the city police, so that the case will actually be handled appropriately.

    The UofM has had a long history of sexual assault and rape, and IIRC at one point was the worst school in the country as far as female students being raped.

    I predict future happiness for Americans if they can prevent the government from wasting the labors of the people under the pretense of taking care of them. - Thomas Jefferson

    The goal of our founding fathers was freedom. The goal of our current politicians is control.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2012
    The problem is the way our culture frames, defines and reacts to rape, namely 1) rapists don't think they're committing rape, or don't think rape is harmful, or think it's justified, and 2) rape is frequent and is committed by people who are not dramatically antisocial or maladjusted.

    Well, I don't thing either point has much to do with how our culture frames, defines, or reacts to rape. Both of these examples are local to the perpetrator themselves. People who commit crimes often don't give consideration to the harm they're causing and they internally justify their actions based on their circumstance. Secondly, not having obvious outward signs of anti social behavior isn't going to tell you much about the person.

    CptKemzik wrote: »

    I'm failing to see where I ever said all men are rapists in this thread, or that entire organizations need to be banned. In fact when I brought up my example in the last page I mentioned how only the local chapter was shut down, and the national fraternity itself made that call. I'm trying to point out that a place can have a "rape culture," without men blatantly running around everywhere trying to perform "honor rapings."

    Saying America can't have incidents of "rape culture," being fostered because "we're not afghanistan!" Is ridiculous.

    (For your consideration, the first paragraph is in a response to a statement I made in general with the the thread, not you specifically)

    I don't think your criteria merits being considered a "culture". Frat culture and rape are not synonymous. Rape is not overwhelmingly synonymous with any other culture either and I don't think any culture particularly fosters that behavior. You can replace "rape" with any number of words. Theft. Murder. Vandalism. In all cases you can find perpetrators who commit their crime with no emotional response, fully justified to themselves. In their immediate environment you will find people that either don't care about subjects behavior or will actively foster that behavior. These are "theft" cultures. Or "murder" cultures or anything else. There are plenty of people who exist in similar situations who don't reduce themselves to violence just fine and no level of stupid nursery rhymes that involve assault will ever convince someone to commit an act they are disgusted by.

    Basically, "rape culture" is a cop out and an easy way to assign blame without taking a look at how society on the macro level operates because it's easy to point at a group of people who's norms you actively dislike and say "this is where/who the problem is" because that protects someone from having to look at their own norms and how they interact with society. It protects them from the realization that they themselves may perpetuate the behavior in some manner.

    In the end, the most you can say is that at some point in time, some one said something that some would take more seriously than others, and it was kind of an asshole thing to say. Well, that may be true, but people get away with saying stupid, assholish, things all the time.
    I actually disagree with the normalization of the former example; I think we should be shocked by that occurrence. I'm just describing what I perceive to be typical reactions to these hypothetical events.

    I agree. I think it should be equally appalling, but I think our "normalized" reaction to that is part of the same thread that runs through all of our society in it's entirety, which is an enormous emphasis on the individual. I find little difference in "The perpetrator is the perpetrator and it's not my business to reform him/her and instead it's my business to punish him/her if/when he acts against me" and "What was he/she doing in that neighborhood at night?" I'm certainly not victim blaming, but I do think that the complete alienation our popular and political culture places between individuals fosters anti social behavior (or down right nastiness) in both the actors and onlookers.
    Unless they are rape victims who use humor as a form of coping. It happens.

    It's also subjective. Both my ex wife and a girl I'm currently involved in are victims of abuse and neither would be offended by the song quoted in this thread. They would be offended at the notion that their "non reaction" would in any way promote assault.
    If a convenience store is robbed, we rarely if ever try to find reasons why the convenience store deserved to be robbed.

    This I also disagree with, but only because I think the idea of the "ghetto liquor store" getting robbed in the bad neighborhood is such a foregone conclusion that no one even bothers taking a moment to consider it at all.
    There's a subset of people who think that rape is okay, as long as you don't use the scary R-word.

    I think that what you've described here is the closest thing we have to a "problem" outside of the actual violent crime itself.

    It reminds me of racists. People, for example, who think that because Barack Obama is black and has a funny name that he obviously is a secret Muslim and no I'm not racist. They're either stupid, in denial, or too cowardly to cop up to their behavior.



    EDIT

    EWom reminded me of a particular tangent as well. Are those that take the crime lightly or help "cover it up" pro rape or do they place the societal importance of the alleged rapist higher than the possible victim? Football player? Wealthy? Minority exchange student? For various reasons these three people would take precedence. This in itself is not indicative of misogyny as the same leniency/callousness exists outside of sexual boundaries.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    I'm curious, what has led you to believe that rapists work in this kind of system?
    Generally, the attitudes that I've seen different groups of men take towards women. If you read my response to FCC above, I think you'll get where I'm coming from. Like, there are some groups of men who will make much more reference to, for example, "pussy", "scoring", "getting some", not just as a matter of the language they choose to use, but also their attitude towards their status from having sex. And then there are other groups who while obviously liking sex, have the 'class' not to make it a big aspect of their personality.
    The sense of entitlement, the idea that "she wants it" or "she's asking for it" or "she deserves it" or whatever other justifications a rapist might use, the confusion of consent and the unwillingness to believe or accept when a woman says no, these are not uncommon, nor are they abnormal.
    I'm not saying they're uncommon; I'm saying they're uncommonly distributed.
    You mentioned, in your interpretation of what I saying, the claim that rapists exist because they are permitted or implicitly encouraged by non-rapists. You also said that rapists are obviously part of rape culture. Essentially, I don't think there is a hard line between the culture that produced a rapist and our culture at large.

    [...] But the ideas that lead to those patterns aren't particularly abnormal or aberrant - they are common, they are well-disseminated, and they are very familiar.
    Okay, here's a basic conundrum here. If the non-rapists are doing their part in convincing the rapists that rape is okay... why isn't it affecting the non-rapists?
    edit: based on your post above, I would re-emphasize that I believe the group of self-reinforcing, rape-permissive or even rape-encouraging individuals is larger and more widespread than you are depicting. You see frat boys and jocks who drug women and assault them; sure, that's a common one, but every subgroup and subculture has its misogyny that leads to resentment and entitlement. We're all familiar with the kind of nerds, for example, who resent women and think they are entitled to sex because they've been such "nice guys," who express terrible sexism out of frustration and self-loathing; that attitude is no better than the stereotypical drink-spiking frat boy.
    Honestly, I'm not super familiar with them beyond internet trolls. And certainly in the nerd subtype, well, I wouldn't expect them to be getting that much of an opportunity. Sexual distribution is pretty skewed to begin with; a much larger proportion of women have regular sex, iirc, than men.

    Bethryn on
  • flamebroiledchickenflamebroiledchicken Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    As a recent example of rape culture at work, you may remember that Liz Trotta, the Fox News pundit who is not a frat bro or part of some sort of self-reinforcing 'subculture' of date-rapists (as far as I know) made comments to the effect that women should not be in the military because 'close contact' naturally leads to rape because 'testosterone rules' in military situations, and actually, there are TOO MANY support programs for women in the military who are being 'raped too much'. In response to a 64% increase in sexual assault in the military since 2006, she said "What did they expect?" This is an adult saying this on national television and people supported and agreed with her.

    flamebroiledchicken on
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2012
    As a recent example of rape culture at work, you may remember that Liz Trotta, the Fox News pundit who is not a frat bro or part of some sort of self-reinforcing 'subculture' of date-rapists (as far as I know) made comments to the effect that women should not be in the military because 'close contact' naturally leads to rape because 'testosterone rules' in military situations, and actually, there are TOO MANY support programs for women in the military who are being 'raped too much'. In response to a 64% increase in sexual assault in the military since 2006, she said "What did they expect?" This is an adult saying this on national television and people supported and agreed with her.

    I think those people are idiots and not particularly pro rape in any sense.

    If you want to say we have a culture of stupid, then by all means and we can probably all agree.

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Bethryn wrote: »
    If the non-rapists are doing their part in convincing the rapists that rape is okay... why isn't it affecting the non-rapists?

    This is an odd question. Do social forces affect everybody equally? Is everybody exposed to rape-facilitating ideas in equal intensity? Does everybody have equivalent levels of empathy, impulse control, libido, and/or aggression? Does everybody start with equal innate propensity to rape? Among individuals with considerable propensity to rape, do all of them get equal opportunities to do so?

    Diversity of effects does not lead us to prima facie reject the existence of causes.

    In any case, the argument is that it is affecting non-rapists, by perpetuating ideas that legitimize, normalize, or otherwise excuse the actions of rapists. There are individuals who would not commit rape, but upon hearing about a rape that was committed, are more likely than others to look for reasons why the rape was deserved or otherwise not all that bad.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • flamebroiledchickenflamebroiledchicken Registered User regular
    What does "pro-rape" mean? If you asked Liz Trotta "Do you think rape is great?", she would probably say "No", sure, but the insistence that rape is ordinary and expected for women in the military, and arguing that we should spend less and not more on support services for sexual assault survivors in the military certainly contributes to an environment wherein rape is more likely to happen again and again.

  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    What does "pro-rape" mean? If you asked Liz Trotta "Do you think rape is great?", she would probably say "No", sure, but the insistence that rape is ordinary and expected for women in the military, and arguing that we should spend less and not more on support services for sexual assault survivors in the military certainly contributes to an environment wherein rape is more likely to happen again and again.

    <3

    This is pretty much a textbook example of rape culture and an excellent explanation of why it is bad.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    What does "pro-rape" mean? If you asked Liz Trotta "Do you think rape is great?", she would probably say "No", sure, but the insistence that rape is ordinary and expected for women in the military, and arguing that we should spend less and not more on support services for sexual assault survivors in the military certainly contributes to an environment wherein rape is more likely to happen again and again.

    I think that has to do with her personal politics, though. It can be considered an unintentional consequence but I wouldn't ascribe it to a "culture".

    QlBGc.jpg
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Feral wrote: »
    Diversity of effects does not lead us to prima facie reject the existence of causes.
    Sure, but I do think it should make use consider which causes are having the greatest effect and why they're having more effect on some subjects than others. From my position, I see my putative self-reinforcing cycle cause having a significantly greater effect on the propensity to rape than a more generalised 'normalisation' from non-rapists.
    Feral wrote: »
    In any case, the argument is that it is affecting non-rapists, by perpetuating ideas that legitimize, normalize, or otherwise excuse the actions of rapists. There are individuals who would not commit rape, but upon hearing about a rape that was committed, are more likely than others to look for reasons why the rape was deserved or otherwise not all that bad.
    Like Liz Trotta, yes, but it seems like those individuals are either a) few and far between, or b) relatively quiet about it on the public front these days (as opposed to, say, 80+ years ago), at which point you have to consider that, if they're quiet about it, are they having a significant effect?

    Bethryn on
  • flamebroiledchickenflamebroiledchicken Registered User regular
    Sheep wrote: »
    What does "pro-rape" mean? If you asked Liz Trotta "Do you think rape is great?", she would probably say "No", sure, but the insistence that rape is ordinary and expected for women in the military, and arguing that we should spend less and not more on support services for sexual assault survivors in the military certainly contributes to an environment wherein rape is more likely to happen again and again.

    I think that has to do with her personal politics, though. It can be considered an unintentional consequence but I wouldn't ascribe it to a "culture".

    Maybe if she was a lone screwball ranting and raving and nobody paid attention or took her seriously, you would have a point, but she is a paid, Emmy-award winning commentator on a much-watched news channel, talking to an audience of dittoheads who happily defended her heinous statements. Also, rape culture cannot be boiled down to one influential idiot saying stupid shit- I was just using Trotta as an example. Rape culture refers to the idea that there are a lot of idiots running around saying stupid shit about women, sex, and rape, and the stupid shit they are saying is having an actual, negative impact on the livelihoods of women.

  • Grid SystemGrid System Registered User
    Bethryn wrote: »
    Before getting into specifics, it would help if you could describe, in broad strokes, what kind of and how many examples you are looking for.
    I want to see what it is that the non-rapist is doing that is allowing the rapist to think he's okay with rape.
    I will direct you to a few comments you have made in this thread:
    Bethryn wrote: »
    What [rape] is is a shithole legally. It's almost always one person's word against another's, and it's a crime of consent rather than physicality (not saying rape isn't physical, but the distinction between rape and legitimate sex is one of consent primarily), which makes it extremely difficult to prosecute without it being either a case of outsider rape, statutory rape, or drug-assisted rape (not including alcohol).
    Here you're basically saying, "as bad as rape is, I can accept that most rapists won't be convicted".
    The other issue is that if you shift the burden of proof onto the alleged rapist, you go down a rabbithole of guilty until proven innocent for a criminal conviction (and sadly, we already have examples of women falsely accusing men of rape, which does every rape victim a massive disservice).
    Here you contribute to the typical rape-discussion script, where someone always raises the issue of false rape accusations. This tells rapists that the automatic question in rape cases is, "is the accuser lying?" And it tells survivors, "your word will be presumed untrustworthy".
    When someone talks of cultures that are 'okay' with rape, I'm really thinking more of Afghanistan and other LEDCs where honour-rape is acceptable, often not even prosecuted, and expected of young men. That is a rape culture.
    And here you try to avoid a critical examination of your society by deflecting attention to some distant land.
    Bethryn wrote: »
    For reference's sake, my current view is that the people who date-rape regularly work in a paedophile-ring like system. They self-reinforce the idea that it's okay to get a girl so drunk/drugged she can't resist and have sex with her. They are distinct from the majority of people, who don't view sexual conquest as an ends-justify-the-means important status marker, and generally view themselves as superior to that majority.
    Bethryn wrote: »
    To try and paint an example, on university campus there are pretty obviously divided groups. The guys who are trying constantly to be hypermasculine, have rooms full of pin-ups, and spend most of the time when out drinking trying to hit on people; pick-up artists etc.; these are the guys I'm thinking of when I say self-reinforcing groups.

    On the other hand, other groups - average dudes, nerdy dudes, guys who are just good at sports but not team players, arty dudes, etc., anyone who won't 'score' just to make sure they 'score'; I don't think they self-reinforce the concept of date-rape being okay, and I think they have the patience not to rape a girl because they think they deserve it. Not to say nobody from these groups commit rape, but rather than incidence rate is significantly lower.
    By describing your idea of the "typical rapist" you allow rapists who do not fit that mold to point to their non-conforming characteristics as evidence that they are not rapists.


    All of the above are attitudes or ideas that make it easier for rapists to get away with rape, and harder for survivors to find the closure they deserve.

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    edited March 2012
    Maybe if she was a lone screwball ranting and raving and nobody paid attention or took her seriously, you would have a point, but she is a paid, Emmy-award winning commentator on a much-watched news channel, talking to an audience of dittoheads who happily defended her heinous statements.

    Who's also a Republican, who themselves tend to be pretty heinous in most of their rhetoric and ideals.
    Rape culture refers to the idea that there are a lot of idiots running around saying stupid shit about women, sex, and rape, and the stupid shit they are saying is having an actual, negative impact on the livelihoods of women.

    I understand, but no crime is an isolated event. Again, you can replace rape with any other crime and say the same thing.

    Though I disagree that merely saying something insensitive has a negative impact on the livelihoods of women.
    Here you're basically saying, "as bad as rape is, I can accept that most rapists won't be convicted".

    Innocent until proven guilty is the basis of our legal system. What Bethryn stated is a simple fact. Not an endorsement. Rape doesn't change the nature of our legal system, benefit of the doubt, rights, etc. Culpability is onerous on both parties by a fault.
    All of the above are attitudes or ideas that make it easier for rapists to get away with rape

    How has what Bethryn said changed the means and methods of our court systems and how it prosecutes violent criminals?

    Sheep on
    QlBGc.jpg
  • RitchmeisterRitchmeister Registered User regular
    I think the whole rape culture is a smokescreen away from the actual issue of whether or not making distasteful comments should result in some kind of punishment, which I do not think it should.
    Yes the boy is probably a cunt, but being a cunt shouldn't be illegal or punishable if it just involves saying things that people find offensive. They have every right to be offended and to moan at him on facebook if they like but it should go no further than that.

  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Bethryn wrote: »
    What [rape] is is a shithole legally. It's almost always one person's word against another's, and it's a crime of consent rather than physicality (not saying rape isn't physical, but the distinction between rape and legitimate sex is one of consent primarily), which makes it extremely difficult to prosecute without it being either a case of outsider rape, statutory rape, or drug-assisted rape (not including alcohol).
    Here you're basically saying, "as bad as rape is, I can accept that most rapists won't be convicted".
    Woah hey no.

    I don't want to accept it, nor am I saying it's okay; I am in no way accepting of the low conviction rate for rape. I'm saying it's real. I'm saying it's an awful catch-22 between protecting the innocent from being convicted for a crime they didn't commit, and meting out justice for rape victims.
    Here you contribute to the typical rape-discussion script, where someone always raises the issue of false rape accusations. This tells rapists that the automatic question in rape cases is, "is the accuser lying?" And it tells survivors, "your word will be presumed untrustworthy".
    False-rape accusations have to be addressed because of the issue of burden of proof. There have been a fair number of attempts/suggestions to push rape convictions up by shifting the burden of proof to the accused rapist.

    I did not say at any point that the presumption should be made that rape victims are lying, nor do I see how you would make that assumption about my position unless you are trying to paint me into a stereotype. My point is that the law has to be ready for any given contingency. The law has to written such that we have the best chance possible of convicting those guilty of a crime, and the least chance possible of convicting those innocent; that is why we have burden of proof and proof beyond reasonable doubt and innocent until proven guilty.
    And here you try to avoid a critical examination of your society by deflecting attention to some distant land.
    Horseshit. I give an example of what I think a really serious rape culture looks like. I have at no point shied from critical examination of my society, and I'm pretty sure I am presently engaged in doing so.
    By describing your idea of the "typical rapist" you allow rapists who do not fit that mold to point to their non-conforming characteristics as evidence that they are not rapists.
    This is more interesting, and I'll have a think about it.

    Bethryn on
  • wazillawazilla Registered User regular
    Feral wrote: »
    What does "pro-rape" mean? If you asked Liz Trotta "Do you think rape is great?", she would probably say "No", sure, but the insistence that rape is ordinary and expected for women in the military, and arguing that we should spend less and not more on support services for sexual assault survivors in the military certainly contributes to an environment wherein rape is more likely to happen again and again.

    <3

    This is pretty much a textbook example of rape culture and an excellent explanation of why it is bad.

    I agree. Very good post. Clear, succinct and persuasive.

    I've been kind of on the fence regarding the rape culture issue. Mostly on the grounds that Sheep has brought up; namely being kind of ill at ease with the use of the term culture, but as fbc pointed out... this was on a national news network, one particularly notorious for trying to set a narrative. She was chosen to take part in establishing a particular part of that narrative. She wasn't just some random caller on a late night AM radio station.

  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    Ugh, whenever I hear the words "rape culture" it's inevitably followed by outrageous sensationalism. This case is no different. Was the little jingle crass and in bad taste? Hell yes it was, but all this situation warranted was someone rolling their eyes at this guy and informing him he was making an ass out of himself. Whenever the feminist blogosphere gets their teeth into something like this and refuses point blank to deal with anything other than extremes they harm the hell out of their own cause. Already I cannot take anyone who uses the term "rape culture" seriously because every argument I've seen it applied to has been fucking ridiculous.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    Bethryn wrote: »
    What [rape] is is a shithole legally. It's almost always one person's word against another's, and it's a crime of consent rather than physicality (not saying rape isn't physical, but the distinction between rape and legitimate sex is one of consent primarily), which makes it extremely difficult to prosecute without it being either a case of outsider rape, statutory rape, or drug-assisted rape (not including alcohol).
    Here you're basically saying, "as bad as rape is, I can accept that most rapists won't be convicted".
    The other issue is that if you shift the burden of proof onto the alleged rapist, you go down a rabbithole of guilty until proven innocent for a criminal conviction (and sadly, we already have examples of women falsely accusing men of rape, which does every rape victim a massive disservice).
    Here you contribute to the typical rape-discussion script, where someone always raises the issue of false rape accusations. This tells rapists that the automatic question in rape cases is, "is the accuser lying?" And it tells survivors, "your word will be presumed untrustworthy".

    This isn't a 'rape culture' thing at all, it's a side effect of the logical underpinnings of a liberal 'innocent until proven guilty' justice system. Generally that prevents defendants from having to prove a negative to avoid faulty convictions, but in consent cases like rape it means the prosecution must prove that something did not occur(ie, consent), which explains the depressingly low conviction rates for the depressingly small number of rapes brought to trial.

    That's not changing unless you plan to alter the fundamental philosophy and accompanying logic of our justice system to 'better to imprison 1,000 innocent men than let one guilty man go free'.

    Tired of getting reamed by Gamestop? Sign up for Goozex!
  • Evil MultifariousEvil Multifarious Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Casual wrote: »
    Ugh, whenever I hear the words "rape culture" it's inevitably followed by outrageous sensationalism. This case is no different. Was the little jingle crass and in bad taste? Hell yes it was, but all this situation warranted was someone rolling their eyes at this guy and informing him he was making an ass out of himself. Whenever the feminist blogosphere gets their teeth into something like this and refuses point blank to deal with anything other than extremes they harm the hell out of their own cause. Already I cannot take anyone who uses the term "rape culture" seriously because every argument I've seen it applied to has been fucking ridiculous.

    My questions to you, then, is this: why is rape such an enormous problem? Where does it come from, and how does it remain so horrifyingly ubiquitous? If a culture that still has an undercurrent of misogyny and twisted sexual values is not contributing to the persistence of sexual assault, what is contributing?

    I don't personally think this guy's comments are a spectacular example of rape culture so much as they are an example of insensitivity, poor taste and a weak grasp of rhyme and meter, though a cavalier attitude about cracking jokes concerning women being unable to refuse consent is probably not a great sign for someone having enlightened attitudes about women.

    Evil Multifarious on
    Inquisitor wrote: »
    I fucking hate you Canadians.
  • FeralFeral Who needs a medical license when you've got style? Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    Already I cannot take anyone who uses the term "rape culture" seriously because every argument I've seen it applied to has been fucking ridiculous.

    This is a very extreme reaction, coming from somebody who laments extreme reactions.

    You can't take me seriously? Or Evil Multifarious? Or Fuzzy? None of us have been wailing or rending our garments.

    every person who doesn't like an acquired taste always seems to think everyone who likes it is faking it. it should be an official fallacy.
    the "no true scotch, man" fallacy.
  • Grid SystemGrid System Registered User
    Sheep wrote: »
    All of the above are attitudes or ideas that make it easier for rapists to get away with rape

    How has what Bethryn said changed the means and methods of our court systems and how it prosecutes violent criminals?

    Who said anything about change? Bethryn's statements are, if not apologetic for, at least accepting of the status quo. This status quo results in 15 of 16 rapists "walking free", according to RAINN. Rapists know this, and are empowered by this knowledge.

    Bethryn wrote: »
    I don't want to accept it, nor am I saying it's okay; I am in no way accepting of the low conviction rate for rape. I'm saying it's real. I'm saying it's an awful catch-22 between protecting the innocent from being convicted for a crime they didn't commit, and meting out justice for rape victims.
    Maybe I'm not giving you enough credit. But it seems to me that even if you think the status quo is regrettable, if you're not thinking of ways it might change, you are, to some greater or lesser degree, accepting it.
    False-rape accusations have to be addressed because of the issue of burden of proof. There have been a fair number of attempts/suggestions to push rape convictions up by shifting the burden of proof to the accused rapist.
    Burden of proof is an issue in every criminal prosecution. But you don't hear about "false robbery accusations" when someone gets robbed, "false fraud accusations" when someone gets scammed, "false dangerous driving accusations" when someone gets run over, or "false assault accusations" when someone gets beat up.

    There are some kinds of crimes where the issue of false accusations do come up. I'm thinking drug crimes and car theft. In those cases, however, the focus is on the police trumping up charges, which is kind of different from rape cases. As far as I'm aware, rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.
    I did not say at any point that the presumption should be made that rape victims are lying, nor do I see how you would make that assumption about my position unless you are trying to paint me into a stereotype. My point is that the law has to be ready for any given contingency. The law has to written such that we have the best chance possible of convicting those guilty of a crime, and the least chance possible of convicting those innocent; that is why we have burden of proof and proof beyond reasonable doubt and innocent until proven guilty.
    The thing is, you don't have to say something explicitly in order to communicate the idea. I have no doubt that you don't want rape survivors to feel like they are automatically viewed with suspicion, but it's an unfortunate reality that the narrative you've bought into--which I think we can agree is commonplace and part of our general culture, not just specific subcultures--does send the message to survivors that they will not be trusted and should prepare to run a proverbial gauntlet if they choose to accuse.

  • JihadJesusJihadJesus Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Victims should be believed by their advocates. The courts must and do assume that they DID consent if consent is disputed in order to presume innocence. There IS no potential solution here that does not involve a fundamental modification of our justice system.

    JihadJesus on
    Tired of getting reamed by Gamestop? Sign up for Goozex!
  • Grid SystemGrid System Registered User
    JihadJesus wrote: »
    Bethryn wrote: »
    What [rape] is is a shithole legally. It's almost always one person's word against another's, and it's a crime of consent rather than physicality (not saying rape isn't physical, but the distinction between rape and legitimate sex is one of consent primarily), which makes it extremely difficult to prosecute without it being either a case of outsider rape, statutory rape, or drug-assisted rape (not including alcohol).
    Here you're basically saying, "as bad as rape is, I can accept that most rapists won't be convicted".
    The other issue is that if you shift the burden of proof onto the alleged rapist, you go down a rabbithole of guilty until proven innocent for a criminal conviction (and sadly, we already have examples of women falsely accusing men of rape, which does every rape victim a massive disservice).
    Here you contribute to the typical rape-discussion script, where someone always raises the issue of false rape accusations. This tells rapists that the automatic question in rape cases is, "is the accuser lying?" And it tells survivors, "your word will be presumed untrustworthy".

    This isn't a 'rape culture' thing at all, it's a side effect of the logical underpinnings of a liberal 'innocent until proven guilty' justice system. Generally that prevents defendants from having to prove a negative to avoid faulty convictions, but in consent cases like rape it means the prosecution must prove that something did not occur(ie, consent), which explains the depressingly low conviction rates for the depressingly small number of rapes brought to trial.

    That's not changing unless you plan to alter the fundamental philosophy and accompanying logic of our justice system to 'better to imprison 1,000 innocent men than let one guilty man go free'.

    I've heard this said a lot, and it doesn't become any more convincing with time. You can absolutely retain an innocent-until-proven-guilty approach while changing the way rape is prosecuted. You don't need a presumption of consent in order to honour the principle. Consent is only half the question; the prosecution will always have to prove that some form of sexual contact took place. As long as that requirement stands, shifting the burden of proof where sex is admitted or otherwise proven and consent is at issue to the defendant does not turn the prosecution into a guilty-until-proven-innocent affair. Making consent (or the honest but mistaken belief in consent) an affirmative defence in rape cases is no different from making self-defence a defence in murder cases. And, in my view, doing so puts the focus of inquiries into credibility and the like on the person who most needs the be scrutinized: the accused.

  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    As far as I'm aware, rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.
    But is this because rape has a "special place" because of rape culture, or is it because it's a uniquely difficulty crime to prosecute on because of its reliance on consent?

    Let's take your examples quickly:
    False robbery accusation - the object of robbery was found in possession of the accused; if it was armed robbery, there may also be additional evidence of the robbery itself. There can also be forensics at the scene of the crime. These are all factors that back up testimony. I don't know if any robbers are convicted purely on the solo testimony of the victim and with absolutely no evidence otherwise backing them up.

    False fraud accusation - proof of transactions are generally involved, or alternatively proof that the salesman was not conforming to regulations for their goods; again, I don't believe this is purely testimony vs testimony.

    False dangerous driving accusations when someone gets run over - well, there's physical evidence that someone was hit by a car. We do know some people run scams of getting hit by a car to get money from people, so there is some possibility of looking into falsehoods here.

    False assault - again, we have bruise marks, sometimes witnesses, and here, unlike in the case of sex, people generally don't consent to getting beat up (in the same way that people do consent to having sex).



    Whereas rape, we have serious problems in terms of evidence. Evidence of penetration or seminal evidence is evidence of sex, but not of non-consensual sex. Evidence of alcohol could be used if the rape were reported quickly enough, but even that is difficult to convict on alone. Physical bruising that can be tied to the accused is good evidence for rape, but I don't believe it is commonly found in date-rape and acquaintance rape. A lot of the time, we just have the testimony of the victim against the testimony of the accused.

    At that point, when that is the only evidence for and against, I believe we have to start looking at which testimony holds the most water, if that's even possible. If we don't, how can we decide for or against?

    So unless that is an inaccurate portrayal of rape prosecution (feel free to correct any falsehoods, I'm going by memory on what I read up about this a few years back), rape receives attention to the falsehood of testimony not specifically because we believe rape victims are likely to lie, but more because testimony is often the only thing that can be examined.


    Rapists know this, and are empowered by this knowledge.
    This confuses me, because I was under the impression that our putative rapists thought they weren't doing anything wrong. How would they be empowered by the idea that they could "get away with it" if necessary, if they didn't think they were doing anything wrong?

    Bethryn on
  • CasualCasual flap flap flap wiggle wiggle wiggle Registered User regular
    Casual wrote: »
    Ugh, whenever I hear the words "rape culture" it's inevitably followed by outrageous sensationalism. This case is no different. Was the little jingle crass and in bad taste? Hell yes it was, but all this situation warranted was someone rolling their eyes at this guy and informing him he was making an ass out of himself. Whenever the feminist blogosphere gets their teeth into something like this and refuses point blank to deal with anything other than extremes they harm the hell out of their own cause. Already I cannot take anyone who uses the term "rape culture" seriously because every argument I've seen it applied to has been fucking ridiculous.

    My questions to you, then, is this: why is rape such an enormous problem? Where does it come from, and how does it remain so horrifyingly ubiquitous? If a culture that still has an undercurrent of misogyny and twisted sexual values is not contributing to the persistence of sexual assault, what is contributing?

    I don't personally think this guy's comments are a spectacular example of rape culture so much as they are an example of insensitivity, poor taste and a weak grasp of rhyme and meter, though a cavalier attitude about cracking jokes concerning women being unable to refuse consent is probably not a great sign for someone having enlightened attitudes about women.

    Saying "man, I just got raped in that SC2 1V1" does not make me a rapist, or supportive of rape any more than saying "man, I want to kill my little sister sometimes, she's so annoying!" makes me a murderer or supportive of murdering children.

    It's the same fantastic leap of logic that brought us "letting grown adults play games with guns trains them to be murderers!".

    If we still lived in a 1950's culture where it was tacitly accepted to give your wife a backhand if she got lippy with you then yes, I would say talking about rape would foster a rape friendly environment. But we don't, people know rape is wrong, that's exactly why they make jokes about it. You tell people they're not allowed to make jokes about something that's a pretty surefire way of getting them to make jokes about it.

    i write amazing erotic fiction

    its all about anthropomorphic dicks doing everyday things like buying shoes for their scrotum-feet
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    Who said anything about change? Bethryn's statements are, if not apologetic for, at least accepting of the status quo. This status quo results in 15 of 16 rapists "walking free", according to RAINN. Rapists know this, and are empowered by this knowledge.

    The numbers in your link and your explanation of those numbers do not correlate. Rapists don't "get away" with the crime because of some random third parties attitude. They "get away" with it because of how our political system works. Regardless, RAINN commits the mistake of assuming guilt before innocence. This artificially skews the numbers.
    But you don't hear about "false robbery accusations" when someone gets robbed, "false fraud accusations" when someone gets scammed, "false dangerous driving accusations" when someone gets run over, or "false assault accusations" when someone gets beat up.

    Who doesn't?

    People file false accusations all the time.
    As far as I'm aware, rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.

    Subjective.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.

    And, as far as threads like these go, rape tends to be the only crime where people are absolutely certain that the alleged perpetrator is 100% guilty.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    Self-defence does not stop murder being a crime, rather it is a mitigating factor that allows the crime.

    Having sex isn't a crime.

    The two are categorically different, and can't meaningfully be compared.

  • SheepSheep Registered User, __BANNED USERS
    Leitner wrote: »
    Having sex isn't a crime.


    I forgot that you don't live in America, where sex is a crime is gaining some seriously disturbing support.

    QlBGc.jpg
  • Indica1Indica1 Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    This thread is full of people taking something somebody said, changing it, then replying to it.
    The Ender wrote: »
    No amount of Jew jokes is going to lead to another holocaust. No amount of rape jokes is going to make somebody just one day decide "Oh hey, I think I'll rape somebody today."

    'No amount of misogynistic communication will lead to misogyny' is a ridiculous & demonstrably wrong statement.

    This guy seriously put fucking quotation marks around something I didn't even say. Die in a fire. Oh sorry, am I promoting murder culture?

    I understand that hearing people laugh about rape could make a rape victim feel bad. As a victim of sexual abuse I would like it if more people took time to understand how many people around them are permanently damaged by things like this. That having been said, from where I'm standing, you do more harm creating an environment where people aren't allowed to joke about something than creating an environment where people can joke about everything they want to. Making rape jokes the most serious and unforgivable thing in the world wont stop a single rape. Not one. Sorry, it's just not that easy. It also wont make people more understanding. But it will make people more fearful. It will make them more judgmental.

    Personally, I don't usually laugh at things that don't involve pain and suffering in some way. It's just not funny to me without pain. If you see me in public laughing at a rape joke please don't think I'm not feeling that pain when I'm laughing.

    Indica1 on

    If the president had any real power, he'd be able to live wherever the fuck he wanted.
  • AManFromEarthAManFromEarth Their ideas are old and their ideas are bad. The King in the SwampRegistered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Sheep wrote: »
    rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.

    And, as far as threads like these go, rape tends to be the only crime where people are absolutely certain that the alleged perpetrator is 100% guilty.

    Haha, bullshit. I mean, maybe for white people, but this is a very wrong statement.

    AManFromEarth on
    Lh96QHG.png
  • LeitnerLeitner Registered User regular
    But you don't hear about "false robbery accusations" when someone gets robbed, "false fraud accusations" when someone gets scammed, "false dangerous driving accusations" when someone gets run over, or "false assault accusations" when someone gets beat up.

    Are we talking public perception, or the way one is treated in the criminal justice system?

    Because whilst I wouldn't compare it in severity, that'd be offensive to survivors, robbery victims and etc are frequently made to feel like they're on trial, and left feeling guilty or dismissed.

    It's a common enough problem to have training specifically to counter this approach.

  • Grid SystemGrid System Registered User
    edited March 2012
    Bethryn wrote: »
    As far as I'm aware, rape is the only crime where people routinely and seriously consider the possibility that the victim made it all up.
    But is this because rape has a "special place" because of rape culture, or is it because it's a uniquely difficulty crime to prosecute on because of its reliance on consent?

    Let's take your examples quickly:
    False robbery accusation - the object of robbery was found in possession of the accused; if it was armed robbery, there may also be additional evidence of the robbery itself. There can also be forensics at the scene of the crime. These are all factors that back up testimony. I don't know if any robbers are convicted purely on the solo testimony of the victim and with absolutely no evidence otherwise backing them up.
    What if the defendant claims that her accuser gave the item to her, absolutely and unconditionally?
    False fraud accusation - proof of transactions are generally involved, or alternatively proof that the salesman was not conforming to regulations for their goods; again, I don't believe this is purely testimony vs testimony.
    Maybe the alleged victim told the accused what to do?
    False dangerous driving accusations when someone gets run over - well, there's physical evidence that someone was hit by a car. We do know some people run scams of getting hit by a car to get money from people, so there is some possibility of looking into falsehoods here.
    Could the defendant claim that the victim was playing chicken? Was trying to commit suicide?
    False assault - again, we have bruise marks, sometimes witnesses, and here, unlike in the case of sex, people generally don't consent to getting beat up (in the same way that people do consent to having sex).
    The legal system certainly could consider "do you want to take this outside" and variations on that theme to be consent, at least to a certain amount of physical injury. I don't think it does, but that's a quirk of jurisprudence more than anything.
    Whereas rape, we have serious problems in terms of evidence. Evidence of penetration or seminal evidence is evidence of sex, but not of non-consensual sex. Evidence of alcohol could be used if the rape were reported quickly enough, but even that is difficult to convict on alone. Physical bruising that can be tied to the accused is good evidence for rape, but I don't believe it is commonly found in date-rape and acquaintance rape. A lot of the time, we just have the testimony of the victim against the testimony of the accused.

    At that point, when that is the only evidence for and against, I believe we have to start looking at which testimony holds the most water, if that's even possible. If we don't, how can we decide for or against?

    So unlss that is an inaccurate portrayal of rape prosecution (feel free to correct any falsehoods, I'm going by memory on what I read up about this a few years back), rape receives attention to the falsehood of testimony not specifically because we believe rape victims are likely to lie, but more because testimony is often the only thing that can be examined.
    I think the biggest issue I have with what you've written is your apparent assumption that rape is uniquely he-said, she-said. In my experience, criminal law always has at least two competing "theories of the case", and very often the winning theory is the one with the more compelling testimony (i.e. not just any kind of evidence) behind it.

    Rapists know this, and are empowered by this knowledge.
    This confuses me, because I was under the impression that our putative rapists thought they weren't doing anything wrong. How would they be empowered by the idea that they could "get away with it" if necessary, if they didn't think they were doing anything wrong?
    Many rapists are aware of the fact that if their victims' stories are believed, they could be convicted of rape. They may not agree with the narrative that the survivor might present, and therefore not think they they did anything wrong, while still recognizing that the chilling effects rape survivors feel benefit them.

    Grid System on
  • EddEdd Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    Casual wrote: »
    If we still lived in a 1950's culture where it was tacitly accepted to give your wife a backhand if she got lippy with you then yes, I would say talking about rape would foster a rape friendly environment. But we don't, people know rape is wrong, that's exactly why they make jokes about it. You tell people they're not allowed to make jokes about something that's a pretty surefire way of getting them to make jokes about it.

    Here's the problem I have. I won't argue with you that the vast majority of Americans, if asked, would categorically say "Yes, I believe rape is wrong." That's not a gotcha question. But to consequently mitigate rape's presence in discourse as a problem assumes that "rape" has a stable definition that everyone totally agrees with. A guy who says "Rape is wrong" perhaps imagines some grizzled old man brutalizing some innocent woman, not a college kid taking advantage of a girl who had one too many.

    Edd on
  • DisrupterDisrupter Registered User regular
    edited March 2012
    I have an honest question, it may come off as trolling, but I promise, this is something I honestly want an opinion on.

    To get extreme, if I go up to a half passed out drunk friend and ask to borrow their keys, and they manage to muster out a "Sure." I am not committing grand theft auto for borrowing their car. But if the same thing happened with sex, I would definitely be commiting date rape. Why is that?

    I am not saying it shouldn't be. But what makes "sex" somehow special where we treat it so different? Why is someones decision to drink too much held accountable when they make mistakes in life, but when it comes to sex we consider them a victim?

    Disrupter on
    616610-1.png
  • BethrynBethryn Registered User regular
    Haha, bullshit. I mean, maybe for white people, but this is a very wrong statement.
    I think what Sheep means is the method of reporting rape occurrence incidence is often non-verifiable. So, for example, in 2010 there were 84.8k reports of rape to the police (source: http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl02.xls UCR - forcible rape - 2010). There was a 40.3% clearance rate for these rapes ( http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/clearances ).

    So for just under 60% we don't know whether the report is true or false, as it was never cleared. It is unverifiable. However, rape advocacy groups will tend to take these figures as examples of minimum number of rapes that occured in a year, despite the unverifiability of the statistic (there is the equally unverifiable 'unreported rapes' statistics provided by many rape advocacy groups).

    This isn't an assertion that false reporting is or isn't there, or a judgment of how prevalent it might be; only that, in general, there is an assumption made by some parties that all of these reports are true.

This discussion has been closed.