Thread: One in Four Abused? Mary Koss Study Update?

It is important to understand the sequences of events of the 'studies' and the rationales behind them.

Koss was asked by Gloria Steinhem, the Ms Magazine editor, to construct a survey for the magazine's readers. Steinham was well aware and concerned that the ostensive definitions of rape (ostensive meaning the examples used to define by event example/description) were 'too restrictive'. It 'limited' rape to what we all understand rape to be. ie: a violent sexual attack.

Steinhem sought the help of Koss to muddy the waters and extend the ostensive definition.

The survey was conducted - in the late '70's - through the magazine with 'readers', mostly radid feminists, providing the answers. This was a very narrowly defined sample, self-selected, and not at all random. It was useless for generalisation. There was no 'follow-up' to confirm the answers or gain additional information.

Koss asked far more than three questions so as to expand the ostensive definition of rape to include 'post-coital regret', with or without alcohol, as well as other diluting descriptions.

Koss then used some of those questions with students at her American University - another unrepresentative sample confined to a small age and experience group of more or less homogeneitive nature - in the early '80's, so as to be able to publish an academic paper. Only a few questions could possibly get past without approbation from her peers.

The writer Annemarie above refers to that 'academic' study.

It should also be noted that Koss refused for many years to release her raw data to other academic researchers so they could 'replicate' as is standard practice.

Interviews later conducted by others with her respondant student sample saw a mass repudiation of anything like 'Rape' having occurred. Indeed many of the women who were classified as having been raped disclaimed any rape at all and had gone on to have fruitful relationships with their 'rapists'.

Koss is a Professor. She is one of many, many bogus Professors who have riden the feminist academic elevator to the gravy train of tenure, fame, book sales and fortune. She and her fellow feminist academics do not lack intelligence, but they are entirely without intellectual honesty.

That, by the way, is a moral issue.

IWF in the Media: US News & World Report

IWF Miffs the Myth Makers with Provocative Campus Ad
by John Leo September 1, 2001

David Horowitz' 10-point anti-reparations ad in college newspapers was bound to provoke imitators with the same goal -- to show how hostile to free speech our campus culture has become.

So the Independent Women's Forum (IWF) sent college newspapers an ad debunking "the 10 most common feminist myths" -- many of them false or wildly exaggerated statistics allegedly showing how relentlessly men oppress women.

The ad called campus feminism "a kind of cult," and asked: "Are you tired of male-bashing and victimology?...Have you been misled by factually challenged professors?"

The Yale Daily News ran the ad. The Columbia Daily Spectator refused to, on the grounds that it doesn't accept political ads (though it published a Ralph Nader campaign ad last fall). The Harvard Crimson said no, dithered for two weeks over the ad's "unnecessarily incendiary" language, then brightly said yes as the academic year was ending. ("They were just running out the clock," said Kate Kennedy of IWF.)

But the most revealing reaction was at UCLA, where the Daily Bruin ran the ad and campus feminists responded with outrage of the sort that greeted Horowitz.

Two feminist groups demanded that the Bruin issue an apology and a retraction, then promise never to accept similar ads in the future. Christie Scott of the UCLA Clothesline Project said, "I think it was a violent ad, a very hostile ad. It breeds a very bad attitude toward campus women."

This language reflects two lines of thought on how to achieve censorship without seeming to violate the First Amendment.

One is to depict ordinary argument as violent behavior, which should be forbidden or punished like any other act of violence, not protected as speech.

Stanley Kurtz, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, writes: "Once words we don't like have been equated with acts of violence, there's no place left for free speech."

Keep your head down. The other line of attack is to suppress speech under sexual harassment doctrine on grounds that a hostile environment is being created. Campus codes of behavior seem to invite this strategy.

UCLA feminists discovered that the guidelines for student publications forbid any ad that "stereotypes�persons of a particular gender." Since the IWF ad makes the case that sexual differences between males and females are real, not "constructed," as campus orthodoxy now insists, the ad presumably could have been banned as harming women by promoting a stereotype.

Arguments like this show why vigorous debate is so rare and dangerous on campus these days.

Almost any unorthodox view can be denounced by the nearest censor as a violent or hostile act.

Better to keep your head down, keep smiling at the PC police, and wait until graduation to say what you think.

Tina Oakland, feminist and director of the UCLA Center for Women and Men, was particularly incensed about the ad's first item: "Myth: One in four women in college has been the victim of rape or attempted rape."

Challenging this number, Oakland told Ben Domenech of National Review Online, is like denying the Holocaust. But the 1-in-4 stat is one of feminism's most popular "advocacy numbers" that can't stand much analysis.

A recent survey funded by the Justice Department aid about 1.7 percent of female college students per year are victims of rape -- �unwanted completed penetration by force or the threat of force" -- and an additional 1.1 percent are victims of attempted rape.

In a companion study, when a comparable group of women were asked differently worded questions, the rate of completed rapes was 11 times lower, 0.16%. The U.S. Department of Education's studies of reports to campus police came up with a low rate, too. Counting both on- and off-campus offenses, these stats show about 1,800 forcible sex offenses (including fondling) each year at the more than 6,300 post-secondary institutions.

If you triple that number to allow for unreported offenses, it would still come to less than one rape per school each year.

Oakland told the Daily Bruin that the 1-in-4 rape statistic had been cited on the official websites of the FBI and the American Medical Association.

She wasn't fazed when Ben Domenech told her that the stat is nowhere to be found on either the FBI or AMA site. No problem.
"The statistics don't really matter that much in the big picture," she told Domenech. "We're just trying to focus on the real issue here not bicker about numbers."

First, challenging her numbers is like denying the Holocaust. Then when the numbers turn out to be shaky, well, they just don't matter.

The IWF ad...is a clever way of forcing debate on feminist numbers. Professional researchers know these statistics are wobbly or false, but the news media and public often take them as gospel. Now they will have to be debated.

The IWF also grasped the power of Horowitz' stunt-bringing college intolerance into the open by offering an ad he knew the censors would suppress. To many, it was a revelation that the news media could be forced to focus on the oppressiveness of current campus orthodoxy. Horowitz changed the discussion. IWF is just the first of his imitators.

This article originally appeared in U.S. News and World Report. Reprinted with permission.

Quote from Ohso

I have run in to the '1 in 4' claim in a number of venues recently, and wanted to know if anyone had links to studies either confirming or debunking the Koss Study, as well as any estimations of the real levels for both genders?

Here is a bit from NeW about the issue.

Thanks - Ohso.
>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

"Network of enlightened Women: Online Book Club Chapter Six: Men Aren't The Enemy"

Online Book Club Chapter Six: Men Aren't The Enemy
Posted by Annemarie at 10/27/2009

Chapter 6 discusses a very difficult topic—violence. Carrie Lukas treats this issue with respect and enlightens her readers with a refreshing realization; feminists often distort the truth to make us believe their dogma.

Society typically views women as victims of violence. Carrie Lukas disagrees,

"One often hears the phrase 'violence against women,' but rarely, if ever, the words 'violence against men.' Yet men continue to be much more likely than women to be the victims of a violent crime. Although violence against men has fallen during recent decades, men were almost 40 percent more likely than women to be the victim of violent crime in 2003, and 3.4 times as likely to be murdered in 2002."


Feminists have distorted the facts, making claims that one in four women are victims of rape or attempted rape. This statistic was the result of a faulty survey conducted in 1982 by Mary Koss:

"In 1982, Mary Koss, who had written for Ms. Magazine, surveyed three thousand college women. Their responses to three questions were used to determine if they had been raped: Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs? Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force (twisting your arm, holding you down, etc.) to make you?"


A Berkeley School of Social Welfare professor went on to question Koss's findings:

"If your date mixes a pitcher of margaritas and encourages you to drink with him and you accept a drink, have you been "administered" an intoxicant, and has your judgement been impaired? Certainly, if you passout and are molested, one would call it rape. But if you drink and, while intoxicated engage in sex that you later come to regret, have you been raped? Koss does not address these questions specifically, she merely counts your date as a rapist and you as a rape statistic if you drank with your date and regret having sex with him."


Our end goal should be stopping all violence against women and men, and the key is to be informed:

"Women should know the true facts about the prevalence of violence in our society, not the inflated statistics that feminists often repeat to suggest that violence against women is unavoidable. Although too many women are still victims, crime rate have actually dropped considerably during that last decade. It's also important to remember that violence affects both genders. In fact, men are far more likely to be victims of violent crimes than are women. A face-based understanding of the prevalence of violence is the best way form women to protects themselves and their families."

""Feminists have distorted the facts, making claims that one in four women are victims of rape or attempted rape. This statistic was the result of a faulty survey conducted in 1982 by Mary Koss:""

sure some distort the fact others just confabulate them to mend their purpose - to achieve the noble state of equality with ugh ! men

there! I said it the politiclly incorrect word men

I guess feminits do distort the facts feminit agitprop including feminit wimyns' studies operate by their jingle

cock a doodle do
we love rubbery figures
we do we do

Independent Women's Forum
One in Four? Rape myths do injustice, too.

Independent Women's Forum, U.S.A., by Carrie Lukas, April 27, 2006

One in four women is the victim of rape or attempted rape.

This familiar statistic comes to mind as the rape indictment of two Duke University lacrosse players dominates national news. It may be a fitting backdrop for this scandal, not just because the statistic reminds us that all women are vulnerable to this terrible crime, but also because the evidence behind the number is dubious.

"One in four" has been repeated so often on college campuses and in the media that many people accept it without question. Few know how it was calculated. Few ask, because asking implies questioning its veracity, and, in this post-feminist era, it's taboo to question sex-crime data or the claims of any alleged rape victim.

Christina Hoff Sommers of the American Enterprise Institute delved into these uncomfortable waters in Who Stole Feminism. The one-in-four statistic, she found, was derived from a survey of 3,000 college women in 1982. Researchers used three questions to determine if respondents had been raped: Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs? Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force... to make you? And, have you had sexual acts...when you didn't want to because a man threatened to use some degree of physical force... to make you?

Based on women's responses, researchers concluded that 15 percent of women surveyed had been raped and 12 percent had experienced an attempted rape. Therefore, 27 percent of women more than one in four were either the victims of rape or attempted rape. This is the origin of the one-in-four statistic.

Yet other data from that same survey undercut its conclusion. While alcohol surely plays a part in many rape cases, the survey's wording invites the label of rape victim to be applied to anyone who has ever drank too much, had a sexual encounter, and then regretted it later. In addition, only 25 percent of the women whom researchers counted as being raped described the incident as rape themselves. The survey found that four in ten of the survey's rape victims, and one in three victims of attempted rape, chose to have intercourse with their so-called attacker again. The survey researchers scratched their heads as to why these women would return to their attackers, but Sommers asks the obvious question: "Since most women the survey counted as victims didn't think they had been raped, and since so many went back to their partners, isn't it reasonable to conclude that many had not been raped to begin with?"

Correcting for the biases in the original survey yields a radically different picture of the prevalence of rape in America. Subtract the women identified by the alcohol and drug question and those who didn't think they had been raped, and total victims fall to between 3 and 5 percent of the women surveyed. This remains an alarmingly high number, but significantly less alarming than the one-in-four figure.

It certainly is possible that this revised estimate understates the frequency of rape women may be reluctant to admit having been violated even in an anonymous survey. Another study, for example, found that one in eight American women about 12 percent had been victimized.

Regardless of the exact figure, rape is a terrible crime too prevalent in our society. Great efforts should be made to reduce the number of victims and bring perpetrators to justice. Allegations of rape, including those at Duke, must be taken seriously and investigated fully.

In the past, victims of rape were made to feel that the crime was their fault. Many women around the world still suffer this bias. Today in the United States, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction. A man accused of rape often is convicted in the court of public opinion without evidence.

At Duke, a woman has accused three men of raping her. Two have been indicted. We know the names of the accused; we've seen their pictures; their lives will never be the same. We've learned terrible things about the Duke lacrosse players: One sent a chillingly misogynistic email, and there are reports of racial slurs. One is standing trail for a previous assault charge. This behavior deserves condemnation, and we as a society should consider why these young men have adopted this behavior.

Perhaps the evidence will show they also committed the heinous crime of rape. If so, they will be and they should be severely punished. Yet the media so quick to sensationalize the accuser's account and condemn the lacrosse players now is revealing facts suggesting that the accused might be innocent of this crime. Our legal system presumes innocence until guilt is proven. The rest of us, watching on TV and chatting at the watercooler, should try to do the same.

- Carrie Lukas is vice president for policy and economics at the Independent Women's Forum and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism.

Something about raped men, if you are still interested in some numbers:

According to the National Clearinghouse on Family Violence in Canada:Self-report studies provide a very different view of sexual abuse perpetration and substantially increase the number of female perpetrators. In a retrospective study of male victims, 60% reported being abused by females (Johnson and Shrier, 1987). The same rate was found in a sample of college students (Fritz et al., l 981). In other studies of male university and college students, rates of female perpetration were found at levels as high as 72% to 82% (Fromuth and Burkhart, 1987, 1989; Seidner and Calhoun, 1984). Bell et al. (1981) found that 27% of males were abused by females. In some of these types of studies, females represent as much as 50% of sexual abusers (Risin and Koss, 1987). Knopp and Lackey (1987) found that 51% of victims of female sexual abusers were male.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Two studies examined the prevalence and emotional impact of men's nonconsensual sexual interactions with women. The first study included a sample of 247 heterosexual men with a mean age of 18.3 years. The second study was a replication with a sample of 153 heterosexual men with a mean age of 22.3 years. All respondents completed a measure of nonconsensual sexual interactions including the use of three aggressive strategies (physical force, exploitation of the man's incapacitated state, and verbal pressure) and three forms of unwanted sexual contact (kissing/petting, sexual intercourse, and oral sex). In addition, the relationship to the female initiator was explored. For each type of nonconsensual sexual interaction, respondents indicated the affective impact of the experience. In Study 1, 25.1% of respondents reported at least one incident of nonconsensual sex with a woman and 23.9% reported attempts by women to make them engage in nonconsensual sexual activity. In Study 2, the overall prevalence rate for completed nonconsensual sexual interactions was 30.1%, and 23.5% of the men reported attempts at making them engage in nonconsensual sex. In both samples, exploiting the man's inability to offer resistance was the most frequently reported aggressive strategy. Kissing/petting was the most frequently reported unwanted sexual activity, followed by sexual intercourse and oral sex. Prevalence rates were higher for nonconsensual sex with an (ex-)partner or friend than for nonconsensual sex with an unknown women. Ratings of affective impact revealed that men rated their nonconsensual experiences as moderately upsetting. The findings are discussed in the light of previous studies on men's unwanted sexual experiences and the extant literature on women's nonconsensual sexual interactions with men. - from here
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Male libido myth puts pressure on both sexes
Allison Hanes, National Post Published: Friday, September 21, 2007
The stereotype of the male stud who is always up for sex is being challenged by new research from the University of Guelph showing that men are almost as likely to be coerced in the bedroom as women.
A study of 518 university students found that 38.8% of men and 47.9% of women reported being pressured into a range of sexual activity, from kissing and cuddling to intercourse and oral sex.

But the most surprising finding was the link between popularized notions of the male libido and the susceptibility of both genders to pressure, said Cailey Hartwick, the lead author of the study published in the Canadian Journal of Human Sexuality.
The existence of traditional stereotypes may cause men to engage in sexual activity rather than feel guilty about refusing it. Meanwhile, adherence to such stereotypes by women may fuel the belief "that resistance may be somewhat futile against a man's indomitable desire for sex," the study stated.
It may also in part explain coercive behaviour by women toward men.
"I hadn't anticipated that. I thought it would possibly predict men being coerced because of the whole idea that they should want to have sex and feel guilty if they don't," Ms. Hartwick in an interview. "What I thought was interesting was that it put both men and women at risk of sexual coercion."
Of the 251 males and 267 female respondents who completed the anonymous questionnaire, 23.3% of men and 34% of women related being pressed into kissing and fondling, while 18.3% of men and 21.1% of women said they were strong-armed into intercourse and 5.8% of men and 4.2% of women complained of being cajoled into oral sex.

The study defined coercion as everything from mild cajoling to full-blown sexual assault. However, only a tiny fraction of respondents told of being physically forced into sex. The majority reported being seduced by "guilt-tripping" or intoxication.
In his Vancouver sex therapy practice, David McKenzie said he has counselled thousands of couples whose most common complaints are women with low sex drive followed by men with a sexual dysfunction.
"I could probably count on less than two hands that I've ever heard the man say that he felt coerced into having sex at any time," Dr. McKenzie said. "I certainly notice a good proportion of women who want regular sex with their partners and sometimes a man will have difficulty that way in performing. But it's more of a performance issue. It doesn't have to do with 'I just don't feel like sex tonight, dear,' while the women is sitting there ... dying to have sex with him."
Josey Vogels, a sex columnist and author of several books, including Bedside Manners: Sex Etiquette Made Easy, also said she rarely hears men complaining about being pushed into sex.
"But given our culture's belief that men want it anytime, all the time, I suspect it would be much harder for a man to admit he didn't want it," she said. "Men [and women] are conditioned to think that any way a guy can get laid is a score -- the old 'she can seduce me anytime' bravado.

"I do, on the other hand, hear a lot from women who complain their partners don't want sex as much as she does and that she has to initiate all the time, which could be considered a form of coercion, I suppose."

But Peter Davison, executive director of a Nova Scotia-based organization called Men For Change, says he was not surprised in the least. In discussion groups he runs, many involving university-age students, many men express frustration over the pressure to live up to the myth of the male lothario.
"I think there's a lot of misunderstanding about male performance and the fact that some men actually want to form emotional bonds before they have sexual encounters," Mr. Davison said. "There's the stereotype is that we're ready to go at any moment and the truth is we're not; the truth is we desire authentic human connection." - from here
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Predictors of Sexual Coercion Against Women and Men: A Multilevel, Multinational Study of University Students
Abstract:
Several explanations have been forwarded to account for sexual coercion in romantic relationships. Feminist theory states that sexual coercion is the result of male dominance over women and the need to maintain that dominance; however, studies showing that women sexually coerce men point towards weaknesses in that theory. Some researchers have, therefore, suggested that it is the extent to which people view the other gender as hostile that influences these rates. Furthermore, much research suggests that a history of childhood sexual abuse is a strong risk factor for later sexual victimization in relationships. Few researchers have empirically evaluated the first two explanations and little is known about whether sexual revictimization operates for men or across cultures. In this study, hierarchical linear modeling was used to investigate whether the status of women and adversarial sexual beliefs predicted differences in sexual coercion across 38 sites from around the world, and whether sexual revictimization operated across genders and cultures. Participants included 7,667 university students from 38 sites. Results showed that the relative status of women at each site predicted significant differences in levels of sexual victimization for men, in that the greater the status of women, the higher the level of forced sex against men. In addition, differences in adversarial sexual beliefs across sites significantly predicted both forced and verbal sexual coercion for both genders, such that greater levels of hostility towards women at a site predicted higher levels of forced and verbal coercion against women and greater levels of hostility towards men at a site predicted higher levels of forced and verbal coercion against men. Finally, sexual revictimization occurred for both genders and across all sites, suggesting that sexual revictimization is a cross-gender, cross-cultural phenomenon. Results are discussed in terms of their contributions to the literature, limitations of the current study, and suggestions for future research.

3% of men reported forced sex (of which 2.1% was forced vaginal sex... this is in fact men reporting victimization by women)

22% of men reported verbal sexual coercion

By comparison, in the same study it was found that:
2.3% of women reported forced sex (don't ignore the decimal point)
25% of women reported verbal sexual coercion - from here
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the international Dating Study (Straus 2003)
"(The)... median rate of forcetd sex perpetrated by male sutdents was 4% and by female students 1.9%"
The rates for using sexual coercion was 28% for men and 22% for women
Other studies (Anderson - An Investigation into Male Victimisation from Domestic Violence... - 1998, Fiebert - College Women who initiate Assaults on their Male Partner... -1998) found similar high incidence rates.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
From the National Violence Against Women Survey
Persons Raped in Previous 12 Months by Sex of Victim:
Women 0.3% - Men 0.1%

from here

Stanley Kurtz, a fellow at the Hudson Institute, writes: "Once words we don't like have been equated with acts of violence, there's no place left for free speech."

Quite so.

MISANDRY - The Hatred of Men, Masculinity and Normal Heterosexuality is such a staple of out bought and paid for 'free press' as to resemble fluoride in the water supply.

Even when purportedly showing sympathy for men - the same BAMN BAMN (Bash Men, By Any Means Necessary) core of Radical Gender Feminist Hate Propaganda is being pushed relentlessly.

Where - oh ever vigilant 'watchdogs' of the press - are these 'Statistics" that allegedly Show the rates of injury???

Are they Secret Statistics, Magic Statistics... or perhaps just Political Propaganda masquerading as Statistics.

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics - all three have proven useful tools for radical gender feminist Misandry.

Ohso.
In a time of universal deceit, telling the truth is a revolutionary act. George Orwell

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
Bay Area Women Against Rape runs hot line for male survivors of sexual assault By Kristin Bender - Oakland Tribune

Oakland - As its name suggests,, Bay Area Women Against Rape is an agency that was founded by women to help women.

But that was 38 years ago. Since that time, the agency has grown, expanded its focus, assisted more people annually, and earlier this year started a sexual-assault hot line (510-845-7273) for male sexual-assault victims and men who want to support a woman rape victim.

"When we started the agency, rape was really thought to be a gender issue, it only happened to women, and men were only the perpetrators. So there wasn't a need," said the Oakland agency's Executive Director Marcia Blackstock. "But as we've grown, we are seeing it happen more to men, and people are talking about it."

Statistics show that 1 in 4 girls and 1 in 6 boys will be sexually assaulted before age 18, Blackstock said.
.................................................. ............................................


One in Four? Rape myths do injustice, too.
Independent Women's Forum, U.S.A., by Carrie Lukas, April 27, 2006

One in four women is the victim of rape or attempted rape. This familiar statistic comes to mind as the rape indictment of two Duke University lacrosse players dominates national news. It may be a fitting backdrop for this scandal, not just because the statistic reminds us that all women are vulnerable to this terrible crime, but also because the evidence behind the number is dubious.

"One in four" has been repeated so often on college campuses and in the media that many people accept it without question.

Few know how it was calculated. Few ask, because asking implies questioning its veracity, and, in this post-feminist era, it's taboo to question sex-crime data or the claims of any alleged rape victim.

Christina Hoff Sommers of the American Enterprise Institute delved into these uncomfortable waters in Who Stole Feminism. The one-in-four statistic, she found, was derived from a survey of 3,000 college women in 1982. Researchers used three questions to determine if respondents had been raped: Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man gave you alcohol or drugs? Have you had sexual intercourse when you didn't want to because a man threatened or used some degree of physical force... to make you? And, have you had sexual acts...when you didn't want to because a man threatened to use some degree of physical force... to make you?

Based on women's responses, researchers concluded that 15 percent of women surveyed had been raped and 12 percent had experienced an attempted rape. Therefore, 27 percent of women more than one in four were either the victims of rape or attempted rape. This is the origin of the one-in-four statistic.

Yet other data from that same survey undercut its conclusion. While alcohol surely plays a part in many rape cases, the survey's wording invites the label of rape victim to be applied to anyone who has ever drank too much, had a sexual encounter, and then regretted it later.

In addition, only 25 percent of the women whom researchers counted as being raped described the incident as rape themselves. The survey found that four in ten of the survey's rape victims, and one in three victims of attempted rape, chose to have intercourse with their so-called attacker again.

The survey researchers scratched their heads as to why these women would return to their attackers, but Sommers asks the obvious question: "Since most women the survey counted as victims didn't think they had been raped, and since so many went back to their partners, isn't it reasonable to conclude that many had not been raped to begin with?"
Correcting for the biases in the original survey yields a radically different picture of the prevalence of rape in America. Subtract the women identified by the alcohol and drug question and those who didn't think they had been raped, and total victims fall to between 3 and 5 percent of the women surveyed. This remains an alarmingly high number, but significantly less alarming than the one-in-four figure.

It certainly is possible that this revised estimate understates the frequency of rape women may be reluctant to admit having been violated even in an anonymous survey. Another study, for example, found that one in eight American women about 12 percent had been victimized. Regardless of the exact figure, rape is a terrible crime too prevalent in our society. Great efforts should be made to reduce the number of victims and bring perpetrators to justice. Allegations of rape, including those at Duke, must be taken seriously and investigated fully. In the past, victims of rape were made to feel that the crime was their fault. Many women around the world still suffer this bias. Today in the United States, the pendulum has swung too far in the other direction.

A man accused of rape often is convicted in the court of public opinion without evidence. At Duke, a woman has accused three men of raping her. Two have been indicted. We know the names of the accused; we've seen their pictures; their lives will never be the same. We've learned terrible things about the Duke lacrosse players: One sent a chillingly misogynistic email, and there are reports of racial slurs. One is standing trail for a previous assault charge. This behavior deserves condemnation, and we as a society should consider why these young men have adopted this behavior. Perhaps the evidence will show they also committed the heinous crime of rape. If so, they will be and they should be severely punished. Yet the media so quick to sensationalize the accuser's account and condemn the lacrosse players now is revealing facts suggesting that the accused might be innocent of this crime.

Our legal system presumes innocence until guilt is proven. The rest of us, watching on TV and chatting at the watercooler, should try to do the same. -
Carrie Lukas is vice president for policy and economics at the Independent Women's Forum and the author of The Politically Incorrect Guide to Women, Sex, and Feminism.

The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths
Courtesy of the Independent Women's Forum

April 17, 2001
TAKE BACK THE CAMPUS

Are you tired of male-bashing and victimology?
Have you had your fill of feminist "Ms./Information"?
Have you been mislead by factually challenged professors?

TAKE THIS TEST:

Campus feminism is a kind of cult: as early as freshman orientation, professors begin spinning theories about how American women are oppressed under "patriarchy." Here is a list of the most common feminist myths. If you believe two or more of these untruths, you may need deprogramming.

The Ten Most Common Feminist Myths:

1. Myth: One in four women in college has been the victim of rape or attempted rape.

Fact: This mother of all factoids is based on a fallacious feminist study commissioned by Ms. magazine. The researcher, Mary Koss, hand-picked by hard-line feminist Gloria Steinem, acknowledges that 73 percent of the young women she counted as rape victims were not aware they had been raped. Forty-three percent of them were dating their "attacker" again.

Rape is a uniquely horrible crime. That is why we need sober and responsible research. Women will not be helped by hyperbole and hysteria. Truth is no enemy of compassion, and falsehood is no friend.

(Nara Schoenberg and Sam Roe, "The Making of an Epidemic," Toledo Blade, October 10, 1993; and Neil Gilbert, "Examining the Facts: Advocacy Research Overstates the Incidence of Data and Acquaintance Rape," Current Controversies in Family Violence eds. Richard Gelles and Donileen Loseke, Newbury Park, CA.: Sage Publications, 1993, pp.120-132; and Campus Crime and Security, Washington, D.C.: U.S. Department of Education, 1997. *According to this study, campus police reported 1,310 forcible sex offenses on U.S. campuses in one year. That works out to an average of fewer than one rape per campus.)

2. Myth: Women earn 75 cents for every dollar a man earns.

Fact: The 75 cent figure is terribly misleading. This statistic is a snapshot of all current full-time workers. It does not consider relevant factors like length of time in the workplace, education, occupation, and number of hours worked per week. (The experience gap is particularly large between older men and women in the workplace.) When economists do the proper controls, the so-called gender wage gap narrows to the point of vanishing.

(Essential reading: Women's Figures: An Illustrated Guide to the Economic Progress of Women in America, by Diana Furchtgott-Roth and Christine Stolba, published by the Independent Women's Forum and the American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C. 2000.)

3. Myth: 30 percent of emergency room visits by women each year are the result of injuries from domestic violence.

Fact: This incendiary statistic is promoted by gender feminists whose primary goal seems to be to impugn men. Two responsible government studies report that the nationwide figure is closer to one percent. While these studies may have missed some cases of domestic violence, the 30% figure is a wild exaggeration.

(National Center for Health Statistics, National Hospital Ambulatory Medical Care Survey: 1992 Emergency Department Summary , Hyattsville, Maryland, March 1997; and U.S. Bureau of Justice Statistics, Violence-Related Injuries Treated in Hospital Emergency Departments: Washington, D.C., August 1997.)

4. Myth: The phrase "rule of thumb" originated in a man's right to beat his wife provided the stick was no wider than his thumb.

Fact: This is an urban legend that is still taken seriously by activist law professors and harassment workshoppers. The Oxford English Dictionary has more than twenty citations for phrase "rule of thumb" (the earliest from 1692), but not a single mention of beatings, sticks, or husbands and wives.

(For a definitive debunking of the hoax see Henry Ansgar Kelly, "Rule of Thumb and the Folklaw of the Husband's Stick," The Journal of Legal Education, September 1994.)

5. Myth: Women have been shortchanged in medical research.

Fact: The National Institutes of Health and drug companies routinely include women in clinical trials that test for effectiveness of medications. By 1979, over 90% of all NIH-funded trials included women. Beginning in 1985, when the NIH's National Cancer Center began keeping track of specific cancer funding, it has annually spent more money on breast cancer than any other type of cancer. Currently, women represent over 60% of all subjects in NIH-funded clinical trails.

(Essential reading: Cathy Young and Sally Satel, "The Myth of Gender Bias in Medicine," Washington, D.C.: The Women's Freedom Network, 1997.)

6.Myth: Girls have been shortchanged in our gender-biased schools

Fact: No fair-minded person can review the education data and conclude that girls are the have-nots in our schools. Boys are slightly ahead of girls in math and science; girls are dramatically ahead in reading and writing. (The writing skills of 17-year-old boys are at the same level as 14-year- old girls.) Girls get better grades, they have higher aspirations, and they are more likely to go to college.

(See: Trends in Educational Equity of Girls & Women, Washington, D. C.: U.S. Department of Education, June 2000.)

7. Myth: "Our schools are training grounds for sexual harassment... boys are rarely punished, while girls are taught that it is their role to tolerate this humiliating conduct."

(National Organization of Women, "Issue Report: Sexual Harassment," April 1998.)

Fact: "Hostile Hallways," is the best-known study of harassment in grades 8-11. It was commissioned by the American Association of University Women (AAUW) in 1993, and is a favorite of many harassment experts. But this survey revealed that girls are doing almost as much harassing as the boys. According to the study, "85 percent of girls and 76 percent of boys surveyed say they have experienced unwanted and unwelcome sexual behavior that interferes with their lives."

(Four scholars at the University of Michigan did a careful follow-up study of the AAUW data and concluded: "The majority of both genders (53%) described themselves as having been both victim and perpetrator of harassment -- that is most students had been harassed and had harassed others." And these researchers draw the right conclusion: "Our results led us to question the simple perpetrator-victim model...")(See: American Education Research Journal, Summer 1996.)

8. Myth: Girls suffer a dramatic loss of self-esteem during adolescence.

Fact: This myth of the incredible shrinking girls was started by Carol Gilligan, professor of gender studies at the Harvard Graduate School of Education. Gilligan has always enjoyed higher standing among feminist activists and journalists than among academic research psychologists. Scholars who follow the protocols of social science do not accept the reality of an adolescent "crisis" of confidence and "loss of voice." In 1993, American Psychologist reported the new consensus among researchers in adolescent development: "It is now known that the majority of adolescents of both genders successfully negotiate this developmental period without any major psychological or emotional disorder [and] develop a positive sense of personal identity."

(Anne C. Petersen et al. "Depression in Adolescence," American Psychologist February 1993; see also, Daniel Offer, and Kimberly Schonert-Reichl, "Debunking the Myths of Adolescence: Findings from Recent Research," Journal of the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, November 1992.)

9. Myth: Gender is a social construction.

Fact: While environment and socialization do play a significant role in human life, a growing body of research in neuroscience, endocrinology, and psychology over the past 40 years suggests there is a biological basis for many sex differences in aptitudes and preferences. In general, males have better spatial reasoning skills; females better verbal skills. Males are greater risk takers; females are more nurturing.

Of course, this does not mean that women should be prevented from pursuing their goals in any field they choose; what it does suggest is that we should not expect parity in all fields. More women than men will continue to want to stay at home with small children and pursue careers in fields like early childhood education or psychology; men will continue to be over-represented in fields like helicopter mechanics and hydraulic engineering.

Warning: Most gender scholars in our universities have degrees in fields like English or comparative literature--not biology or neuroscience. These self-appointed experts on sexuality are scientifically illiterate. They substitute dogma and propaganda for reasoned scholarship.

(For a review of recent findings on sex differences see a special issue of The Scientific American "Men: The Scientific Truth," Fall 2000.)

10. Myth: Women's Studies Departments empowered women and gave them a voice in the academy.

Fact: Women's Studies empowered a small group of like-minded careerists. They have created an old-girl network that is far more elitist, narrow and closed than any of the old-boy networks they rail against. Vast numbers of moderate or dissident women scholars have been marginalized, excluded and silenced.

(Essential reading: everything by Camille Paglia; Daphne Patai and Noretta Koertge--Professing Feminism: Cautionary Tales from the Strange World of Women's Studies; and Christina Hoff Sommers--Who Stole Feminism? How Women have Betrayed Women)

**Should you encounter an item of Ms/information in one of your classes, in a textbook, or a women's center "fact" sheet, let us know. We will print it on our campus website, SheThinks.org, correct it with accurate information, and politely inform the source of the mistake.

We are a women's group dedicated to restoring reason, common sense and open discussion to the campus.