Rape
:''For other uses of the word rape (for example, the plant called rapeseed), see Rape (disambiguation).'' Rape is a crime wherein the victim is forced into sexual activity against his or her will, in particular sexual penetration. It is considered by most societies to be among the most severe crimes. Some dictionary definitions of the word ''rape'' include any serious and destructive assault against a person or community, but this article focuses primarily on sexual assault. ==Definition and history== ===Etymology=== The origin of the word is the Latin ''rapere,'' to seize or take by force. The Latin term for the act of rape itself is ''raptus.'' Originally, the word ''rape'' was akin to ''rapine'', ''rapture'', ''raptor'', ''rapacious'', and referred to the more general violations— looting, destruction, and capture of citizens— inflicted upon a town or city during war. ===History=== The concept of rape, both as abduction and in the sexual sense, makes its first appearance in early religious texts. In Greek mythology for example, we find the rape of women, exemplified by the rape of Europa (mythology) , as well as male rape, found in the myth of Laius and Chrysippus (mythology). Different values were ascribed to the two actions. The rape of Europa by Zeus is represented as an abduction followed by consensual lovemaking, similar perhaps to the rape of Ganymede (mythology) by Zeus, and it was not punished. The rape of Chrysippus by Laius however is represented in darker terms. The act was known in antiquity as "the crime of Laius," a term which came to be applied to all male rape. It was seen as an example of hubris in the original sense of the word, i.e.: violent outrage, and its punishment was so severe that it destroyed not only Laius himself, but also his son, Oedipus. In antiquity, and until the late Middle Ages rape was seen as a crime against the male figure dominating the particular girl or woman. Thus the penalty for rape was often a fine payable to the father or the husband whose "goods" were "damaged." That position was replaced by the view that the woman as well as her lord should share the fine equally. Rape in the course of war also dates back to antiquity, ancient enough to have been mentioned in the Bible, which condones the abduction of women as war trophies. Another form of sexual assault mentioned in the Bible is the taking of an opponent's foreskin, though no mention is made of whether the enemies are living or dead. ''See story of David and Jonathan'' Conquering Greek, Persian and Roman troops would routinely rape women and boys in the conquered towns. The same behaviour was observed as late as the 1990's, as the Serbian troops targeting Bosnia and Kosovo conducted a calculated campaign of raping women and boys in the areas they controlled.[http://www.kamilat.org/News/Serbs.htm] Rape as an adjunct to warfare was prohibited by the military codices of Richard II and Henry V of England (1385 and 1419 respectively). These laws formed the basis for convicting and executing rapists during the Hundred Years War (1337-1453). ===Usage=== In its original sense - dating back to antiquity - to rape a person meant to capture the person for the purpose of enslavement, and was common in ancient warfare. In this context, the willingness of the victim is irrelevant to categorization of the act as "rape". The "Rape of the Sabine " was a "rape" in this context. In Alexander Pope's ''The Rape of the Lock'', the word "rape" is used in hyperbole in a similar context, exaggerating a trivial violation against a person. Though the sexual connotation is today dominant, the word "rape" is sometimes used in a non-sexual context. For example, environmental destruction is sometimes described as "raping the earth", and the Rape of Nanking describes a violation both against a town as well as the people. In "the rape of the Silmarils" in J. R. R. Tolkien's The Silmarillion, the word "rape" is directly used with its old meaning of "seizing and taking away". Sometimes the word rape is used in metaphorical and extended uses to dysphemism describe forms of non-sexual unwelcome conduct. It is argued by some that this usage is demeaning or disempowering of victims and survivors of real sexual rape, because it ends up by weakening the force and horror of the word. Such metaphorical and hyperbolic usages are common with other words, for example "''It was absolute torture''" to mean ordinary embarrassment; or "I'm starving" to mean "I'm feeling hungry") Victims and survivors of rape, and their allies, may find this type of usage pejorative and deeply offensive, since it normalizes the term "rape" to cover mundane events. Examples include:- :In internet culture, using the word "raped" to refer to having one's online writings voted/moderated downwards by a large number of people. :''"they raped his name in the media"''. :''"I got anally raped by that class"''. :''"The wood had been raped of its peace"''. (From a book, of disturbance caused by a foxhunt in a forest) :''"The rape of England"''. (A newspaper article headline with a pun referring to the rapeseed plant self-seeding on waste ground and motorway verges) However these usages are not always in fact examples of hyperbole. The last two examples are continuations of the original meaning of "violating" in a general sense. ===Common law=== In the United Kingdom and the United States common law, "rape" traditionally described a man who forces a woman to have sexual intercourse with him. Until the late 20th Century, forced sex by a husband against his wife was not considered rape throughout history, since as part of the marriage both partners were deemed to have given implicit informed consent in advance to a lifelong sexual relationship. However, modern criminal law in most Western countries have now legislated against this exception and now include spousal rape and acts of sexual violence other than vaginal intercourse, such as forced anal intercourse, which were traditionally barred under sodomy laws, in their definitions of "rape". The term "rape" is sometimes considered "loaded" and many jurisdictions recognize, in its stead, broader categories of sexual assault or sexual battery. ===United States Uniform Crime Reports=== In the United States, the ''Uniform Crime Reports'' use the term "forcible rape" only to describe rapes perpetrated by men against women. States, however, often expand the definition. Male-on-male rapes are usually recognized as such, as are (rare) female-perpetrated rapes. ===English law=== Under the Sexual Offences Act 2003, which came into force in April 2004, rape in England and Wales was redefined from non-consensual vaginal or anal intercourse and is now defined as non-consensual penile penetration of the vagina, anus or mouth of another person. The changes also made rape punishable by a maximum sentence of life imprisonment. Although a woman who forces a man to have sex cannot be prosecuted for rape under English law, she can be prosecuted for causing a person to engage in sexual activity without consent, a crime which also carries a maximum life sentence if it involves penetration of a mouth, anus or vagina. The statute also includes a new sexual crime called "assault by penetration" which also has the same punishment as rape and is committed when someone sexually penetrates the anus or vagina with a part of his or her body, or anything else, without that person's consent. ==Aspects of rape== ===Violent rape=== Violent rape is when violence beyond the rape itself is a part of the assault. This may include physical force or threat of harm, including death threats or threats against a family member. People who commit violent rapes include strangers and people the victim already knows. Proportionally, more violent rapes are more likely to be reported. (Bachman and Saltzman, 1995). ===Statutory rape=== ''Main article at: Statutory rape'' National and/or regional governments, citing an interest in protecting minors, consider people under a certain age to be unable to give informed consent. The age at which individuals are considered competent to give consent is the age of consent. Sexual contact with an individual below the age of consent is considered to be rape even if that person agrees to the sexual activity. The limits set by each state vary in accordance with local standards, and range from 13 to 21. Sex which violates age-of-consent law but is neither violent nor physically coerced is sometimes described as ''statutory rape'', the name of a legally-recognized category in the USA. ===Acquaintance ("date") rape=== The term ''acquaintance'' (or ''date'') ''rape'' refers to sexual activity or rape between people who are already acquainted, or who know each other socially - friends, acquaintances, people on a date, or even people in an existing romantic relationship, where it is alleged that consent for sexual activity was not given, or was given under duress. In most jurisdictions, there is no legal distinction between rape committed by a stranger, or by an acquaintance, friend or lover. There is often more difficulty in securing conviction against an assailant who was known at the time. This is due to the "grey" nature of the situation (see #.22Gray_rape.22); the standard of proof required for non-consensual sexual activity is often harder to meet (or easier to deny), than when two strangers meet or there has been violence. In general, some evidence suggests that rapists are far more likely to know their victims than not [http://www.aaets.org/arts/art13.htm]. Other reports suggest that it can work both ways, not only acquaintance rape is more common than previously thought, but also situations of this kind can give rise to false allegations more often than had been expected (see #Overreporting_and_false_reporting). ===="Grey rape"==== Some cases of date rape are colloquially described as "grey rape" cases because, while the alleged victim expresses displeasure at the encounter, he or she cannot demonstrate nonconsent. The expression "grey rape" refers to the absence of information - there is nothing actually "grey" in the act itself: if the act was nonconsensual then it is considered rape, even if not actionably so. Contributing factors to "grey" rape include poor communication by either party, misleading or (deliberately) misread body language, or the feeling by one party of being unsure or unable to express what one wishes (which may be for many reasons). ===Drugging=== Hypnotic agents such as flunitrazepam (Rohypnol) and GHB, known as "date rape drugs", have been used by rapists to render their victims unconscious before raping them. According the to [http://www.usdoj.gov/dea/ongoing/daterapep.html DEA], "Victims may not be aware that they ingested a drug at all. GHB and its analogues are invisible when dissolved in water, and are odorless. They are somewhat salty tasting, but are indiscernible when dissolved in beverages such as sodas, liquor, or beer." According to the National Institute on Drug Abuse [http://www.nida.nih.gov/infofax/RohypnolGHB.html] "Rohypnol can incapacitate victims and prevent them from resisting sexual assault. It can produce "anterograde amnesia," which means individuals may not remember events they experienced while under the effects of the drug." The sedative effects of Rohypnol begin to appear approximately 15–20 minutes after the [http://www.whitehousedrugpolicy.gov/drugfact/club/index.html drug] is ingested. The effects typically last from 4–6 hours after administration of the drug, but some cases have been reported in which the effects were experienced 12 or more hours after administration. These drugs are extremely dangerous and may kill or render the victim comatose. It is imperative that any investigation into the suspected use of date rape drugs involve the taking of blood from the victim and an immediate test of the blood, as the length of time between the taking of the blood and the testing for these drugs results in a degradation of the drug in the blood, even after it has been drawn. Waiting too long to test for the presence of date rape drugs may cause false negatives. However, trying to deduce whether date rape drugs have been used from symptoms is an approach that can cause false positives. In Perth, Australia in 2003, during a time when the media were reporting a drink-spiking epidemic, 44 women had their blood tested because they believed they had been the victims of drink spiking. The West Australian Chemistry Centre tested the blood samples and in these 44 cases, the only substance found in the victim's system was excessive alcohol (which in large amounts has the same effects as "date rape" drugs, causing unconsciousness and memory loss). Police said that the blood-alcohol level of most of the subjects was significantly higher than the women themselves expected, based on their assessment of the amount of drinks consumed, and commented: :"While we can't dismiss all cases, the results suggest that a fair proportion of drink spiking is just an urban myth ... It seems that a proportion of young women are getting incredibly intoxicated and using drink spiking as an excuse to explain behaviour they are not happy with." [http://www.thesundaymail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,6766753%255E1702,00.html] Testing kits that claim to detect GHB, Ketamine and benzodiazepines such as Rohypnol in seconds are commercially available under names such as "The Drink Detective". ===Male rape=== Males can also be raped (more commonly by other males, but also by females). It is a myth that a man cannot be forced into sex. Men are just as traumatized by rape as female victims. In many countries rape of males is legally classified under a different law or name, however the nature of the incident, and its consequences, are similar or identical. It is said that rape of males is taken less seriously due to the stereotypical views held about males in modern society. Common myths - Male victims, like female victims, do not all "want sex", nor does the physiological effect of erection or orgasm mean that sex was "really wanted" or "liked". (A capable assailant can force these physical responses in the majority of males, given appropriate planning for their assault). Also male on male rape doesn't imply homosexuality of either party. Mens' Rights lobbyists are pushing for tougher "male rape" laws, and have gained some success--for example, fellatio a man without his permission is grounds for a charge of second degree rape in the United States. * Resource: [http://www.secasa.com.au/index.php/survivors/10/207 SE Center against Sexual Assault - male rape myths, reality, and support] ===Custodial and prison rape=== ''Main article at: Custodial rape'' Research carried out by Cindy Struckman-Johnson and David Struckman-Johnson of the University of South Dakota has found that 22% - 25% of male prisoners in the United States have been the victim of sexual assault, 10% have been the victim of rape, and 6% have been the victim of gang rape. Women prisoners are especially vulnerable to assault by guards and other staff members, and the incidence in the United States has been denounced by Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch. ===Rape and sexual torture=== In circumstances where torture is being employed as a means of military or governmental policy, rape of both female and male detainees is a common element of that torture. It is used often as a means to "soften" detainees for interrogation or to intimidate them into compliance. In societies with strong social taboos on sexuality, sexual torture is commonly used to destroy the credibility and influence of politically dissident individuals. Rape under such circumstances often has even more profoundly negative psychological effects than under circumstances in which sexual assaults usually happen. See also humiliation, Abu Ghraib prisoner abuse, Nanjing Massacre. ===Sex trafficking=== Trafficking is a term to define the recruiting, harboring, obtaining, transportation of a person by use of force, fraud, or coercion for the purpose of subjecting them to involuntary acts, the most common being forced commercial sexual exploitation (forced prostitution). See also trafficking in human beings ===Gang rape=== Gang-rape (also known as "pack rape" or "gang bang") occurs when a group of people participates in the rape of a single victim. It is far more damaging for the victim, and in some jurisdictions is punished more severely than rape by one person. "Gang bang" is also a slang term for consensual group sex. According to Roy Hazelwood, a profiler of sexual crimes, "[Gang rape] involves three or more offenders and you always have a leader and a reluctant participant. Those are extremely violent, and what you find is that they're playing for each other's approval. It gets into a pack mentality and can be horrendous." ===Consent=== There is considerable debate as to what constitutes proper and complete Informed consent in a sexual relationship. How explicit consent should be, how frequently it needs to be established, and what constitutes diminished capacity (usually due to drugs or alcohol) are all subjects of some disagreement. These debates take place both on moral and ethical grounds, and as a legal issue, since rape can only be convicted as a crime with intent in many jurisdictions, and the erroneous belief of consent is a common defense. ==Effects== A proportion of violent sexual assaults end with the death or serious injury of the victim. Other consequences can include pregnancy or sexually transmitted diseases. The most common effect of rape on victims is psychological. In the past, survivors of rape and sexual assault were often diagnosed with Rape Trauma Syndrome (RTS), then considered an psychological disorder. RTS is no longer considered a diagnosis, but rather a set of normal psychological and physiological reactions that a victim is likely to experience. These include, but are not limited to, feelings of guilt and shame, tension, anger, eating disturbances, and sometimes Clinical depression. The reactions are very similar to those that would be experienced by a survivor of any other traumatizing experience. The psychological trauma is cited as one of the reasons that rape is usually not reported to the authorities. Because of the sexual nature of rape crimes, victims often suffer serious psychological Psychological trauma. This is especially true in societies with strong sexual customs and taboos. For example, a woman (and especially a virgin) who is raped may be deemed "damaged" by society: she may suffer isolation, may be prohibited to marry, be divorced if she was married or even killed. She may also feel "dirty" or as if the crime was her fault. The process to denounce and eventually convict an offender is often hindered by similar psychological effects. Victims frequently feel shame when describing what has happened (especially if the victim is male or a female victim must report the incident to a male law officer). Also, the intimate questions and medical examinations required for prosecution can make the victim uncomfortable. In societies that do not accord equal civil rights to women and men, this process is even more difficult for female victims. ===Medical emergency information=== :''Main articles: Medical emergency and Sexual assault According to the American College of Emergency Physicians (ACEP) in the USA, rape is a medical emergency. [http://www.acep.org/1,32848,0.html]. Medical and law enforcement professionals often strongly recommend that a victim call for help and report it. A victim seeking medical attention as soon as possible will allow prompt treatment for possibly life threatening injuries and disease, and preserve evidence. Many recommend that victims should not bathe or clean themselves before the exam; not only to prevent the loss of physical evidence but to also not delay medical attention. Physical injuries such as gynecologic hemorrhage, rectum or internal hemorrhage may have resulted. Additionally, emergency contraception and preventative treatment against sexually transmitted diseases may be required, in particular prophylactic treatments to prevent HIV infection. In many locations, emergency medical technicians, emergency room nurses and doctors are trained in how to help rape victims. Some emergency rooms have rape kits which are used to collect evidence. AIDS prophylaxis is possible within 48 hours but not always deemed appropriate given the extremely small chance of transmission in many cases (0.1 - 0.3%, or between 1 in 333 and 1 in 1000), the lack of certainty of any effective results (it reduces rather than removes the risk), and the often severe side effects of drugs required. This would usually be a clinical decision based upon circumstances. [http://www.fhi.org/en/RH/Pubs/Network/v21_1/NW21-1HIVpostexpostretmnt.htm] ===RAINN=== Some groups also operate hotlines to offer advice and psychological first aid. In the United States, one of the most prominent hotlines for rape victims is operated by the organization RAINN (The Rape, Abuse and Incest National Network). RAINN is the only toll-free, completely confidential 24-hour hotline that provides this service in America. Their telephone number is 1-800-656-HOPE. ==Rapists== ===Rapist profiles=== Dr. A. Nicholas Groth, author of ''Men Who Rape: The Psychology of the Offender'', described four types of deliberate rapists, based on their motivations and behavior patterns. Forensics scientists, criminology , and law enforcement agencies often use these profiles to analyze rapists and prevent future rapes. Since rapes are predominantly perpetrated by men, a male perpetrator is assumed in these profiles. *The power-assertive rapist: This is argued to be the most common type of rapist, accounting for about 40 percent of all reported rapes. An alpha male, he tends to value machismo and physical aggression. Often, he will commit date rape against victims he meets in places like bars, but he may pose as or be an authority figure. Power-assertive rapists do not intend to kill their victims, but to traumatize and humiliate them. They rarely target specific people for rape. *The power-reassurance rapist: This type of individual is usually socially deficient and unable to develop interpersonal or romantic relationships. Usually not physically aggressive, he will select and stalk a victim before committing the crime, and this victim is usually a neighbor or work acquaintance. Power-reassurance rapists often force the victim to emulate foreplay and take "trophies" of the rape, and may record the event in a personal journal. Power-reassurance rapists usually have average intelligence, insecurities about their masculinity, and tend to be the least violent type of rapist. They also often fantasize about consensual sexual relationships with women, rather than violent conquest. Law enforcers describe this type of rapist, responsible for about 27.5% of reported rapes, as the "gentleman rapist". *Anger-retaliatory rapist: Responsible for about 28% of rapes, this type of individual is often a drug abuse with impulsive behavior and anger-related pathologies. This type of rapist does not target specific victims, and often feels misogyny in general. The anger-retaliatory rapist's attacks are usually spontaneous and brutal, and, while he does not intend to kill the victim, may beat her to death if she resists. This rapist usually has below-average intelligence and is likely to leave more evidence than other types of rapists. *The anger-excitation rapist: This type of rapist, considered the most dangerous and elusive, accounts for about 4.5 percent of rapes. The anger-excitation rapist exhibits behavior characteristic of antisocial personality disorder, and is therefore often perceived as charming and intelligent. This makes such rapists difficult to catch. The anger-excitation rapist may or may not choose victims selectively. Often sadistic, he will often torture or murder his victim to prevent her from identifying him, or for his own sexual gratification. Ted Bundy was an example of this type of rapist. ===Warning signs=== It is very difficult to predict who may or may not be a potential rapist. Considering rapists have many personality types and use many different methods, it might seem impossible. However, certain behavioral characteristics have been observed in some rapists. These should be used cautiously as "warning signs", since non-rapists and other innocent people may also show similar behaviours. * Extreme emotional insensitivity and egotism. * Habitual degradation and verbal devaluation of others. * Tries to tell others what they are feeling and thinking as though it is his decision and not theirs. ''"She said no, but she meant yes".'' * Consistently uses intimidation in language or threatening behavior to get his way. Uses words like "bitch" and "whore" to describe women. * Excessive, chronic, or brooding anger. * Becomes obsessed with the object of his romantic affections long after his advances have been rejected. * Extreme mood swings. * Violent outbursts; lack of impulse control. * Aggressive and violent. * Under the influence of alcohol or drugs, cruel behavior is seen. ==Rape and punishment== ===Punishment of assailant=== Most societies consider rape a grave offense, and punish it accordingly. The United States punishes it with imprisonment, but until the 20th century would apply the death penalty for the crime, as is still done in many societies. Castration is sometimes a punishment for rape and, controversially, some U.S. jurisdictions allow shorter sentences for sex criminals who agree to voluntary "chemical castration." Racist communities in the Southern states of the U.S. often used phony rape charges to justify vigilante groups (known as "lynch mobs") to seize and kill African American men without due process or trial. The assailants were rarely prosecuted or punished for these mob killings. In some communities, any sexual interaction between an African-American man and a Caucasian woman was characterized as rape, which resulted in a large number of (presumably) innocent men being unjustly murdered. Today, some Americans support reinstating the death penalty for rape, but due to this past use in racial pogroms, many people are against this proposal. Prison sentences for rape are not uniformly long or severe. A study by a statistician from the U.S. Department of Justice, involving about 80 percent of the prison population, found that based on prison releases in 1992, the average sentence for convicted rapists was 9.8 years, while the actual time served was 5.4 years. This follows the typical pattern for violent crimes in the US, where those convicted typically serve no more than half of their sentence. [http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/psatsfv.txt] In Australia in 2002-2003, more than 1 in 10 convicted rapists served a wholly suspended sentence and the average total effective sentence for rape was seven years. [http://www.theage.com.au/articles/2004/10/15/1097784044926.html?from=storylhs] ===Punishment of victims=== While this practice is condemned as barbaric by many present-day societies, some societies punish the victims of rape as well as the perpetrators. According to such cultures, being raped dishonors the victim and, in some cases, the victim's family. In Middle Eastern societies, rape victims may be killed in honor killings to restore a family's name. In the William Shakespeare drama ''Titus Andronicus'', Titus Andronicus kills his raped maimed daughter in what he believes to be a mercy killing. === Rape as punishment === Though modern societies claim to recognize the practice as barbaric, some cultures use rape itself as a form of punishment. Usually, the victim of the rape is a female relative of the person targeted for retaliation. In June of 2002, a Pakistani woman named Mukhtaran Bibi was gang-raped by a vigilante mob after her brother was (falsely) accused of rape himself. The Pakistani government, along with local religious officials, condemned this action and sentenced the rapists to death. In some dictatorships, such as former Iraqi despot Saddam Hussein, rape is or was used as a method of retaliation against and intimidation of political enemies. ==Reporting== ===Underreporting=== According to the 1999 United States National Crime Victimization Survey only 39% of rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials. For male rape, less than 10% are believed to be reported. The most common reasons given by victims for not reporting rapes are the belief that it is a private or personal matter and that they fear reprisal from the assailant. [http://www.vaw.umn.edu/documents/college/college.txt Fisher] "... found that many women do not characterize their sexual victimizations as a crime for a number of reasons (such as embarrassment, not clearly understanding the legal definition of rape, or not wanting to define someone they know who victimized them as a rapist) or because they blame themselves for their sexual assault." Rape-related advocacy groups have suggested several tactics to increase reporting of sexual assaults, most aimed at lessening the psychological trauma often suffered by rape victims following their assault. Many police departments now assign female police officers to deal with rape cases. Advocacy groups also argue for preservation of the victim's privacy during the legal process; it is standard practice among mainstream American news media outlets to not divulge the names of alleged rape victims in news reports. ===Overreporting and false reporting=== A 1997 article in the Columbia Journalism Review deals with the debate surrounding false reporting, and notes that wildly different figures, from 2% to 85% of all rape reports, are widely presented. "...One explanation for such a wide range in the statistics might simply be that they come from different studies of different populations...But there's also a strong political tilt to the debate. A low number would undercut a belief about rape as old as the story of Joseph and Potiphar's wife: that some women, out of shame or vengeance ... claim that their consensual encounters or rebuffed advances were rapes. If the number is high, on the other hand, advocates for women who have been raped worry it may also taint the credibility of the genuine victims of sexual assault." [http://archives.cjr.org/year/97/6/rape.asp] In 1994, Dr. Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University investigated the incidences in one small metropolitan community of false rape allegations made to the police between 1978 and 1987. The falseness of the allegations was not decided by the police, or by Dr. Kanin; they were "... declared false only because the complainant admitted they are false." The number of false rape allegations in the studied period was 45; this was 41% of the 109 total complaints filed in this period. In Dr. Kanin's research, the complainants who made false allegations did so (by their own statements during recantation) for three major reasons: providing an alibi, a means of gaining revenge, and/or a platform for seeking attention/sympathy. Dr. Kanin's small study is widely reported and quoted. Michelle J. Anderson of Villanova University School of Law, in her work "The Legacy of the Prompt Complaint Requirement, Corroboration Requirement, and Cautionary Instructions on Campus Sexual Assault", states: "As a scientific matter, the frequency of false rape complaints to police or other legal authorities remains unknown." [http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=555884] In the 1996 FBI UCR, it is stated that 8% of reports of forcible rape were determined to be unfounded upon investigation. [http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/Cius_97/96CRIME/96crime2.pdf] === Victim blaming === "Victim blaming" is holding the victim of a crime to be in whole or in part responsible for what has happened to them. In the context of rape, this concept refers to popular attitudes that certain victim behaviours (such as flirting or wearing sexually provocative clothing) may encourage rape. In extreme cases victims are said to have "asked for it" simply by not behaving demurely. In most Western countries the defence of provocation is not accepted in mitigation of rape. It has been proposed that one cause of victim blaming is the Just World Hypothesis. People who believe the world has to be fair, may find it hard or impossible to accept a situation in which a person is hurt unfairly and badly for no cause or reason. So this leads to a sense that somehow, the victim must have surely done 'something' to deserve their fate. A global survey of attitudes toward sexual violence by the Global Forum for Health Research [http://www.globalforumhealth.org/filesupld/vaw/attitudes.html] shows that victim-blaming concepts are at least partially accepted in many countries. In some countries victim blaming is more common, and women who have been raped are sometimes deemed to have behaved improperly. Often these are countries where there is a significant social divide between the freedoms and status afforded to men and women. In terms of responsibility, a more mainstream view is that everybody has the theoretical right to feel safe at all times, but that prevention and minimising the risk of being in a dangerous situation are largely up to the individual. The question of a victim on this basis would never be whether or not they 'deserved' to be raped, because nobody "deserves" to be the victim of crime. Under cases of alleged date rape the situation is different. Because the question at hand is frequently whether or not the incident was consensual, whether the alleged victim encouraged the accused or gave implied consent becomes the critical consideration. As such, arguments about the accuser's conduct are an accepted element of an affirmative defense. In the United States, the crime of rape is unique in that it is the only crime in which there are statutory protections designed in favor of the victim (known as rape shield laws). These were enacted in response to the common defense tactic of "putting the victim on trial". Typical rape shield laws prohibit cross-examination of the victim with respect to issues such as her prior sexual history or the manner in which she was dressed at the time of the rape. ==Sexual fantasy== Many people assume that people aroused by Rape fantasy must be more likely than others to commit the actual act, or that victims with rape fantasies actually want to become victims of sexual assault. This does not correspond with observed scientific evidence, however; while rapists usually fantasize about rape, so do normal psychologically healthy people. In fact, an inability to use sexual fantasies for gratification is often regarded by law enforcement and other professionals as a more alarming warning sign than the presence of sexual fantasies of rape or sadism. Millions of normal people fantasize about rape, or ''being'' raped without wanting it to happen in reality. ==Sociobiological analysis of rape== :''Main article: Sociobiological theories of rape Some animals appear to show behavior which resembles rape in humans, in particular combining sexual intercourse with violent assault, such as observed in ducks and geese. It is difficult to determine to what extent the idea of rape can be extended to intercourse in other animal species, as the defining attribute of rape in humans is the lack of informed consent, which is difficult to determine in other animals. However, it is clear that sometimes an animal is sexually approached by another animal and penetrated while it is clear that it does not want it, e.g. it tries to run away. Some sociobiology argue that our ability to understand rape and thereby prevent and treat it is severely compromised because its basis in human evolution has been ignored. They argue that rape as a reproductive strategy is encountered in many instances in the animal kingdom, including among the great apes and presumably among early humans. Some studies indicate it is an attempt by the male of the species to increase his reproductive fitness when he is lacking in ability to persuade the female by non-violent means (Thornhill & Thornhill, 1983). Such sociobiological theories regarding rape as adaptive are highly controversial, and not accepted by all mainstream scientists. Camile Paglia and some sociobiology have argued that victim blaming should not be totally dismissed in all cases, since some sociological models suggest it may be genetically inbuilt for a certain proportion of men and women to act in ways which would tend to raise the chances of rape occurring, and that this may be a biological feature of the species. This is a very controversial view. A contrasting view is given by Lewis Thomas in his "Lives of a Cell: notes of a biology watcher", that rape is not only not an evolutionary benefit to the rapist but that it is strongly maladaptive and therefore selected against. In his recently-published book (Adapting Minds: MIT Press) David Buller tackles the whole of evolutionary psychology, asserting that theories in this field are often provably based on faulty research and heavily biased data. He further goes on to argue that if indeed rape is "programmed into the male brain" then why do most men not rape? Buller considers that rape as a biological imperative doesn't add up. ==Quotes== The Supreme Court of California had this to say on a case involving a woman who was raped by a police officer: :"Along with other forms of sexual assault, it belongs to that class of indignities against the person that cannot ever be fully righted, and that diminishes all humanity." :: ''[http://login.findlaw.com/scripts/callaw?dest=ca/cal3d/54/202.html Mary M. v. City of Los Angeles]'' 54 Cal.3d 202,222 (1991) [285 Cal.Rptr. 99; 814 P.2d 1341] One Supreme Court of the United States opinion included: :We do not discount the seriousness of rape as a crime. It is highly reprehensible, both in a moral sense and in its almost total contempt for the personal integrity and autonomy of the female victim and for the latter's privilege of choosing those with whom intimate relationships are to be established. Short of homicide, it is the "ultimate violation of self." It is also a violent crime because it normally involves force, or the threat of force or intimidation, to overcome the will and the capacity of the victim to resist. Rape is very often accompanied by physical injury to the female and can also inflict mental and psychological damage. Because it undermines the community's sense of security, there is public injury as well. :: ''[http://caselaw.lp.findlaw.com/scripts/getcase.pl?navby=case&court=us&vol=433&page=584 Coker v. Georgia]'' 433 U.S. 584 at 597-598 (1977) [53 L.Ed.2d 982, 97 S.Ct. 2861] (plur. opn. of White, J.; conc. and dis. opn. of Powell, J.).) ==Related articles== * Rape on college campuses * Aggression * Sexual harassment * Sociobiological theories of rape * Sydney gang rapes * trafficking in human beings * There is an ongoing problem with sexual assault in the U.S. military which has resulted in a series of scandals which have received extensive media coverage. ** Tailhook scandal ** [http://www.now.org/press/11-96/11-14-96.html Assaults on trainees at Aberdeen, MD, 1996] ** Air Force Academy sexual assault scandal ==Books and publications== ===Academic and reference books=== * Smith, M. D. (2004). Encyclopedia of Rape. USA: Greenwood Press. * Macdonals, John (1993). World Book Encyclopedia. United States of America: World Book Inc. * Kahn, Ada. (1992). The A- Z of women's sexuality : a concise encyclopedia. Alameda, Calif.: Hunter House. * Kanin, Eugene J. (1994). False Rape Allegations. Archives of Sexual Behavior. * Gowaty, P.A. and N. Buschhaus. (1997). Functions of aggressive and forced copulations in birds: female resistance and the CODE hypothesis. American Zoologist (in press). * Thornhill, Randy and Palmer, Craig T. A Natural History of Rape: Biological Bases of Sexual Coercion. MIT Press, 2001. ===Other=== * Gavin de Becker - The Gift of Fear ISBN 0440226198, (recognising and handling dangerous people and situations) * Doe, Jane - The Real Story of Jane Doe. Toronto: Random House, 2003. * Ghiglieri, Michael P. (1999). The Dark Side of Man: Tracing the Origins of Violence. USA: Perseus Books. == External links == * [http://www.pandys.org Pandora's Aquarium - Message board for victims of sexual assault] * [http://www.rainn.org RAINN - The leading resource in rape and incest information] * [http://www.ibiblio.org/rcip/ Rape Crisis Information Pathfinder - Find journal articles, statistics and online resources on rape and sexual assault] * [http://www.aardvarc.org/rape/about.shtml AARDVARC - An Abuse, Rape, and Domestic Violence Aid and Resource Collection] * [http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/svfacts.htm Sexual Violence Facts from the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control] * [http://www.ncpa.org/studies/s229/s229.html Probability statistics compiled by NCPA from US Department of Justice statistics.] * [http://www.hmso.gov.uk/acts/acts2003/20030042.htm#aofs British Sexual Offences Act 2003] * [http://members.tripod.com/rape_pathfinder_help-ivil/rapecrisispathfinderonlineresources/id36.html Victim Blame: A Bibliography] * [http://www.menweb.org/throop/falsereport/kanin.html False Rape Allegations by Dr. Eugene Kanin] * [http://writ.news.findlaw.com/commentary/20030811_spilbor.html Findlaw article on false rape allegations] * [http://www.ncwiseowl.org/ Groliers Online Encyclopedia- entry on rape] * [http://www.sccadvasa.org/wissa.htm SCCADVASA - "What is Sexual Assault?"] * [http://www.crisiscentersyr.org/mr_smith.html "The Legal Bias Against Rape Victims (The Rape of Mr. Smith)"] - excerpt from an April 1975 American Bar Association Journal article *[http://de.geocities.com/history_guide/horb/index.html The History of Rape : A Bibliography] * [http://www.alltheseyears.net/male.htm Male rape survivor information] * [http://www.abc.net.au/centralvic/stories/s907377.htm Drink spiking - a reality or urban myth?] Sex crimes Torture ms:Rogol
Rape
Note to IP Users - please sign your contributions to the talk page with your name or with
Just adding after taking a look at the archives that many of my points have been twisting very slightly to make no sense at all. This was done by changing the sentence structure or one or two words here and there. I believe one of your vandals uses subtle manipulation to undermine other people's posts. :Well, you should be able to look in the edit history and show us examples of this subtle manipulation, then. You do realize that if they were making a good-faith attempt to improve the article, it isn't WP:vandalism even if it isn't what you wanted the article to say, right? -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 03:25, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) I do realize that. You in fact disagreed with what the person I am thinking of wrote. Perhaps I am using the wrong term. It's not that important if that is the case. :I'm sorry. It's just that working on this article really oversensitizes one if one is both a survivor of sexual assault and of false accusations of sexual assault. People on both sides accuse you of trying to censor "the truth" because you're actually trying to let ''both'' sides be told instead of only theirs. It gets very painful. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 03:51, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) I understand. That's why I don't come here that often! I'm sorry this is painful to you. I did not mean to make comments that would offend users or moderators. Are you a moderator? I mean- do you watch over this article? I don't really understand all the POV terminology as I've never been to the talk forum before. I did not notice it existed. I'm sure it would be horrible to be accused of something you did not do. As a lesbian I've noticed gay males and homosexuals in general are automatically suspected of deviant activities of which they are only as likely as heterosexuals to commit (statistically). I hope this is not too stressful for you- I have read some of the archives and appreciate your insistance on factual references. I did some research on reference books on assault and that is why some parts of this page seem so strange to me. Take it easy- don't let it stress you. People on the internet do strange things. take care, survivor Survivor, can I suggest that you register for an account, or at least visit [http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Welcome%2C_newcomers The Welcome Page] and acquaint yourself with some wiki-customs? It would mean that we could interact with you deliberately and in good faith. This isn't about being in a club or hierarchy, its just about learning a few basic skills in editing and formatting techniques to be better understood. User:AnnaAniston 05:02, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC) Thank you Anna, I am not terribly involved in Wiki (nor do i plan to be a regular- I have other forums I spend too much time on already). I found this page when someone in my MLS program posted an article about Wiki to our listserv. I am interested in reference resources on sexual assault so immediately navigated to this page. I have checked it about once a month since then. I should be logged in as I write this. I am not really interested in getting emails about this topic (as you can imagine that would be very stressful) so the address I have registered with is only to retreive passwords and will not be checked regularly. Not to bring up past issues- but I have concerns over kids/students navigating to this article as a reliable resource. It is not noticably stated that anyone can edit it. Not that I oppose wiki in any way. I just have concerns that the false information I see here will be taken without question as gospel. Most of the people i have mentioned this to express surprise and concern because they have used wiki before as a reference resource. Thanks to the people who work to make sure the information is factual. Do you supose there should be a notation at the top of this forum that all entries are edited by the general public? take care, survivor User:Survivor I have given it some thought and decided that the reason most of these entries are so disputed is that they bear little resemblance to a published encyclopedia article. - edited - I think if we restrict information on this topic to the false reporting section (which should be clearly marked as editable by the way) and simply give information on the names and effects of date rape drugs it would be much more effective. (Rohypnol is generally known by that name and not by it's more obscure one) My apologies- I meant to simply make the point that the drug section should only state the names and descriptions of date rape drugs. False reporting belongs in the false reporting section. If someone hadn't deleted my comments to that effect my point would already have been made. just an idea, survivor User:Survivor ( i am logged in) suggestion: put this disclaimer somewhere on the page: "Wikipedia cannot guarantee, in any way whatsoever, the validity of the information found here." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:General_disclaimer --User:Survivor 06:49, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) ==Mary Koss and the "One in four" statistic== One of the most widely quoted statistics on rape is that "One in four women have been raped", originating with a survey conducted by psychologist Mary Koss in 1985. The survey found that 27.5% of college women were victims of a rape or attempted rape in their lifetime. While also noting this statistic includes attempted rapes as well as actual rapes, it is also important to recognise that 73% of the rape victims did not categorise their experience as rape. (That distinction was made by Koss herself, based on the definition of rape used by most North American legal statutes.) In a study conducted on women in college by the National Institute of Justice, 48.8% of rape victims did not consider themselves "raped." The NIJ posited that these women may have avoided the use of the word "rape" due to embarrassment, reluctance to be blamed for the incident, not understanding the legal definition of rape, or because they did not want to think of an acquaintance as a rapist. Koss' study found that women who had been raped by someone they knew were less likely to label their experience as a rape than those who were raped by strangers, but found the experiences of both types of victims in terms of psychological trauma and relationship/sexual problems to be the same. Koss also found that a majority of the women surveyed for her study tried to stop the rape from happening. 84% tried to talk their attackers out of raping them, and 70% physically struggled against their attackers. These facts are often overlooked or minimalized by those who wish to shed doubt on the 1-in-4 statistic. References: Koss, Mary. "Hidden rape: sexual aggression and victimization in a national sample of students in higher education." In Burgess, A.W. (ed.) Rape and Sexual Assault II. Garland, New York, 1988 Koss, Mary P. and Sarah L. Cook. "Facing the facts: Date and acquaintance rape are significant problems for women". In Current Controversies on Family Violence. Edited by Richard J. Gelles and Donileen R Loseke. Sage, California, 1993. Muehlenhard, Charlene L., Susie C. Sympson, Joi L. Phelps, and Barrie J. Highby. Are rape statistics exaggerated? A response to criticism of contemporary rape research. The Journal of Sex Research 31(2), 1994, pp 144 National Insitute of Justice. The Sexual Victimization of College Women. December 2000. Available online at: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/nij/pubs-sum/182369.htm Orman, Katie. The Date Rape Research Controversy. AARDVARC. Available online at: http://members.aardvark.net.au/~korman/rape/controversy Warshaw, Robin. I never called it rape: the Ms report on recognizing, fighting and surviving date and acquaintance rape. HarperPerennial, New York, 1994. :The above is extremely POV. Mary Koss was a quack of the first degree, and the misuse of her fradulent statistics is a grave crime of propoganda. We went over her methods in my psychology class, and they are unacceptable to almost anyone who is informed of them. She counted as rape: *having consensual sex under the influence of alcohol or other drugs *having consensual sex and later regretting it :and *having consensual sex after having been talked into it or persuaded (i.e. in a completely non-agressive manner) :Her "facts" are about as useful as the "10%" figure on homosexuality (based entirely on if active duty sailors had ever had a homoerotic experience). These sorts of bogus studies deserve discussion, but not the disgraceful interpretation I found in the article. 18:34, 14 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::Okay, Sam_Spade... And why should anybody believe you, when you don't bother to cite anything to back up your claims?--User:Calanctus 11:08, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) :::Well, I've looked at the National Insitute of Justice report, which states that rape is defined as "forced sexual intercourse including both psychological coercion as well as physical force." If the threat of force is 'psychological coercion' I have no problem with that, but if it means any form of persuasion, or even giving someone alcohol, we need to be very suspicious. The report does not make its criteria for psycholgical coercion clear. Any study which counts as 'rape' experiences that the women themselves do not consider to be rapes should surely be treated with scepticism. User:Paul Barlow 14:33, 22 Jan 2005 (UTC) ::::The problem is the question involving 'date rape.' Even mary koss herself has conceded years later that her question regarding voluntary intoxication was misleading and did not actually meet the legal definition of intoxication rape. Not just that, but questions do not necessarily include a threat of physical force as the only criteria. And as has been stated, the vast majority of women surveyed don't consider themselves to have been raped, so that's a bit questionable. -User:Njyoder 14:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) Have you read lies, damn lies and statistics? I don't see how you can attack this statistic without invalidating all statistics. I have discussed these statistics on a forum in the past to see what we could make of them. Many people felt that since rape victims are persecuted so frequently that very few report- stats don't say much. On the other hand we should at least try, eh? I have taken a class on research and the use of statistics and it was enlightening to find that if you don't like your results- you just use a different program til you get ones you do. That goes for rape victim advocates as well as those who prefer not to support victims. We agreed that -with all the statistics floating around -quoting that 'between one in three and one in five women will be sexually assaulted within her lifetime.' was about as fair as we could get in an imperfect world. at any rate- I will supply the urls of all the rape statistics I am aware of : Rape and Sexual Assault Statistics Statistics from RAINN http://www.rainn.org/statistics.html Guide to Statistics from AARDVARK http://www.aardvarc.org/statistics.shtml Sexual Violence statistics from National Center for Injury Prevention and Control http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/svfacts.htm Statistical Abstract of the United States from the US Census Bureau- click on section 5 (Law Enforcement) http://www.census.gov/prod/www/statistical-abstract-04.html Statistics from the FBI - uniform crime reporting http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/03cius.htm Statistics on intimate crime from the Bureau of Justice http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/cvict_c.htm#relate Find statistics on rape at the Bureau of Justice web site- Reporting to Police and Medical Attention http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/abstract/rsarp00.htm National Criminal Justice Reference Service statistics on rape and sexual assault http://virlib.ncjrs.org/Statistics.asp#R Find statistics on various types of crime in the US http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/stsoc.html#crime Statistics on crime internationally http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/stsoc.html#intlcrime Statistics on domestic violence http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/stsoc.html#wabuse Statute of limitations by state from RAINN http://www.rainn.org/statutesoflimitationcrim.html How many people were raped each year in the US? http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm Sexual victimization of college women http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/svfacts.htm Search crime statistics by University http://www.securityoncampus.org/crimestats/index.html Further Statistics http://www.lib.umich.edu/govdocs/stats.html survivor (I am not in the system yet though I am logged in as Survivor) Every single one of those pages is a secondary or tertiary source and thus lack validity. -User:Njyoder 14:01, 29 Apr 2005 (UTC) I'm sorry you don't find them useful. I have found more since posting them. Perhaps someone else may find them useful at some point. take care, survivor National Archive of Criminal Justice Data http://www.icpsr.umich.edu/NACJD/ The National Archive of Criminal Justice Data (NACJD) preserves and distributes computerized crime and justice data from Federal agencies, state agencies, and investigator initiated research projects to users for secondary statistical analysis. Search terms: victimization, National Crime Victimization Survey. This site has some very interesting information and articles. This site includes the following: Adjusting the National Crime Victimization Survey's Estimates of Rape and Domestic Violence for 'Gag' Factors, 1986-1990. Coker, Ann L., and Elizabeth A. Stasny. http://webapp.icpsr.umich.edu/cocoon/NACJD-STUDY/06558.xml The researchers considered whether the type of interview (personal or telephone) and the presence of another person (particularly a spouse) influenced or "gagged" the reporting of rape and domestic violence in the NCVS. It is hypothesized that the inclusion of such yes/no questions would more easily allow victims to report rape or domestic violence incidents in telephone interviews, even with spouses present in the home during the interview. also includes:Cost of Mental Health Care for Victims of Crime in the United States, Criminal Justice Response to Victim Harm in the United States, National Crime Victimization Survey, 1992-2003 (search for latest version) National Center for Injury Prevention and Control http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html This database allows you to find the number of injuries or deaths per year by cause or intent. It also allows you to limit the criteria in a variety of ways for each search. Forgive me if I misinterpret (I am not a statistician) : In 2003 sexual assault was the third leading cause of non fatal injury for women overall (but especially ages 15-24) according the the center for disease control. Sexual Assault 67,085 women were non fatally injured in 2003 in the US. sadly it was the leading cause of nonfatal injury for girls aged 1- 4. Sexual Assault 7,808 in the US in 2003. from: http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars/nonfatal/...003/violfem.htm --User:Survivor 06:29, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) Just thought this might be interesting to some... the CDC appears to have edited it's page (at least I just revisited it). The National College Women Sexual Victimization Study estimated that between 1 in 4 and 1 in 5 college women experienced completed or attempted rape during their college years (Fisher, Cullen, and Turner 2000). [http://www.cdc.gov/ncipc/factsheets/svfacts.htm The National College Women Sexual Victimization Study from the CDC] Fisher BS, Cullen FT, Turner MG. The sexual victimization of college women. Washington (DC): Department of Justice (US), National Institute of Justice; 2000. Publication No. NCJ 182369. Available from URL: www.ncjrs.org/pdffiles1/nij/182369.pdfor www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/pub/ascii/svcw.txt --User:Survivor 06:30, 23 Jun 2005 (UTC) == The Anger-Excitation Rapist == "The anger-excitation rapist exhibits behavior characteristic of antisocial personality disorder, and is therefore often perceived as charming and intelligent." This little bit here doesn't make much sense to me; could someone be so kind as to explain why exhibiting behavior characteristic of antisocial personality disorder would make you appear to be charming and intelligent? User:LavosBacons 04:34, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC) :Well, the characteristics of APD include glibness and superficial charm. Self-confidence can be a very attractive aspect to someone until you realize that the self-confidence is an outgrowth of egomania, and likewise someone who has no qualms about lying to you can seem very charming indeed until you see through the lies. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 07:19, 1 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::All right, then. Going simply by the name, antisocial personality disorder simply doesn't sound like something people would be likely to find particularly charming. Thanks. User:LavosBacons 23:01, Feb 1, 2005 (UTC) == Illustration possibility == I am enclosing a 160 year old image, art depicting a rape scene. I would like to include it in the article. Objections? Affirmations? User:Haiduc 05:22, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) Humm. ''Not'' a good idea, I think. It can easily be interpreted as pornography. Probably because that's just what it is. The Japs still produce quite a lot of similar stuff. User:Paul Barlow 12:22, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) :I disagree. All articles should have images, and this is the most tasteful image I can imagine on the subject. (User:Sam Spade | user_talk:Sam Spade | Special:contributions/Sam Spade) 18:06, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) Well if you are looking for a 'tasteful' image of rape, then try one of the many ''Sabine Women'' pics, Poussin maybe. Or go for Rubens' ''Rape of the daughters of Leucippus''. Of course they all depict rape in the archaic sense of 'forced abduction'. But they are certainly more tasteful. I don't know why all articles should have illustrations. But even if they should, I can see no reason why it should be an actual explicit depiction of a rape in progress.User:Paul Barlow 18:51, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) The pornography argument is not germane, by that token all erotic art would be equated with pornography and that is not a defensible position. The remaining question is whether to use an euphemistic definition of "rape" or an explicit one. The rape of the Sabines is better described (as depicted) as an abduction of the Sabines. Kidnapping may be followed by a rape, or not. So I see that type of picture as belonging in other articles, here it would be misleading. As for why articles should have pictures, my own take on that is that artistic and photographic froms of communication have special power. If we are to free information here, visual representations should not be excluded. User:Haiduc 19:15, 19 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::This article is not supposed to be about 'erotic' experiences of any kind, so the point about erotic art is not a 'defensible position'. But anyway, you provide no argument that callng one thing pornography automatically labels everything 'erotic' as pornographic. By that logic you could never use the word about any image at all. And there could never be ''any'' meaningful distinction between erotic and pornographic. The use of the word 'rape' to refer to violating abduction is not a euphemism (it would be an odd kind of 'euphemism'). It's the original meaning of the word, as you should know if you've read the article. User:Paul Barlow 01:13, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::If I had offered a photograph would you have said that this article is not about photography?! I do not find this image erotic (though some might; an unpublished paper by Julia Lesage suggests that "Many women have rape fantasies as part of their mental process of pleasurably representing sexuality to themselves," and psychoanalysis is replete with such things.) But we should separate thought from action, otherwise what would our Oedipal complexes make of us?. Do you see this as a glorification of rape and a catering to the perverse? I don't, I see it as the opposite, I see a woman being wounded by men with obsessive and animalic expressions. I see it as an indictment of rape. And I think that this very debate that we are having here is a valuable process that should be part of the experience of reading the article. To answer your point about making a distinction between pornography and art, that can degenerate very quickly into a pissing match. A whole line of critics and curators have seen this as art, but even judges on the Supreme Court disagree. MOre to the point, this article is about a disturbing subject, and this work matches it well. The images of the Sabines are euphemistic in that they do not communicate the enormity of the crime, they romanticize the act. Is that what we want here, in 2005? User:Haiduc 04:00, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::::Your arguments are becoming more and more confused. Photography is a ''medium''. It's what the image depicts and how it depicts it that's at issue. I don't believe there are such things as 'Oedipal complexes', but that's another issue. Do I see it as a glorifying of rape? I don't really know what the artist's intentions were. I don't see how you can say so confidently in your caption that it was designed to condemn rape. Japan has a long tradition of graphic rape imagery that continues in its graphic art today and in sex cartoon-films. I don't think most of it is designed to condemn. I made no point about distinguishing between porno and art. I made a point about distinguishing between the ''erotic'' and porno. It think it can be described as porno ''and'' as art, but not as erotic. The ''Sabines'' images are not euphemistic because they do not depict rape in the modern sense of the term. My main worry is that having a graphic visual depiction of rape will seem to be either titillating or deliberately provocative and grotesque by some readers. I don't think we should encourage such responses. User:Paul Barlow 10:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::::Paul, I am willing to continue this discussion depite its increasingly strident tone. My arguments confused?! Do you think ad hominem attacks are appropriate in this forum?
:::::Present day artistic and legal thinking separates pornography and art as being mutually exclusive. Since you agree that this is not an erotic image (for most people, including myself) and since there seems to be a general consensus in the art world (and to some extent here, viz. Sam Spade and Corvun) that this is art, then what we are discussing is an art object. Policy here seems to be that art is OK when related to the topic. :::::Euphemistic or not, the Sabine women shoud be included as an example of "rape as abduction", which does not address "rape as vaginal penetration". :::::As for the caption, the issue revolves around what is or is not a "sympathetic character" in a work of art. :::::As for titillation or revulsion on the part of the readers, what you are suggesting is that we should be nannies to the readers and dumb down the article for fear of offending. I am aware of that type of thinking, it has gained currency lately here and there. I am not a fan of writing for the lowest common denominator, but rather believe that information should be free, especially free to work its effect on pushing the limits of the mind. :::::There are types of denial that are comfortable, and that are indulged in by the media. You will rarely or never see dismembered bodies in war reportage, which distorts the viewer's understanding of war, it sanitizes it and thus makes it more acceptable. Why are we sanitizing rape? And reverting the image and calling it a "troll" is censorship and deception. User:Haiduc 15:04, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::::: I did not remove the image or call you a troll. Two other contributors did. Check it out. An ad hominem attack is an attack on a person. Attacking ''arguments'' as confused is not ad hominem. That's a rather...er...confused use of the term! BTW. I am merely responding to your own dogmatic tone in response to my first post on the topic. I don't think 'present day artistic thinking' separates porn from art in the way you describe (and I have written books about art theory, as it happens). In the UK the obscenity laws concern images that 'deprave and corrupt'. I don't know about other jurisdictions. That is not a ''definition'' of porno, but rather of the grounds for making images illegal. Years ago, I discussed the definition of porn with the feminist writer Susan Kappeler, who wrote the ''Pornnography of Representation''. I don't think there's any real aggreement about whether something can be porno and art. I'd say the two concepts are not exclusive. The graphic imagery you illustrate is typical of prints of this kind, such as Hokusai's famous rape-fantasy image ''The Dream of the Fisherman's Wife'' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Dream_of_the_fishermans_wife_hokusai.jpg), complete with exaggeration of the size of the sexual organs and concentration on the act of penetration. They are, of course, art. But they were also the most visually realistic images in Japanese culture of the day, so are likely to have had the same appeal in their day as realistic photographic images of sex today - i.e. porn. I don't see the two things as contradictory. I suggested nothing about nannying, and why you would think this has anything to do with writing to the 'lowest common denominator', I don't know. By your logic we should have a shot of someone being murdered on a page about "snuff movies". Having such images tends I think to sensationalise the subject. User:Paul Barlow 15:19, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::::Abstaining for a moment on the question of whether we should have an image, and whether it should be this one, I will simply note that I oppose the use of a picture that shows "rape" in its archaic sense, since that is not the focus of the article. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 18:47, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::::Nor do I want to persist against what may be a generalized feeling that this is not appropriate, but it is unfortunate that the debate has been so imprecise, and that the decision to not use the image seems to be based on intangibles rather than reasoned conclusions. As far as this last comment about the focus of the article, forgive me but I am really nonplussed. I even went back to look at the article thinking I had missed something. "Rape is a crime wherein the victim is forced into sexual activity against his or her will." Are we splitting hairs, that this is an old picture and not a new picture?! User:Haiduc 19:11, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) :I think the image should be used. I personally find it disturbing, disgusting, and lacking any form of taste whatsoever. As a professional artist myself and a victim of attempted rape, I think it captures the violent nature of such violation perfectly. Even in the encyclopedic spirit of emotional indifference and objectivity, the emotional effects of such a horrific act as rape cannot be denied and should not be censored. I'd go so far as to say that it can only be a person's personal revulsion to the naked terror of the act that this or any other graphic image might depict that would lead one to wish its exclusion from the article; that our personal revulsion should not determine whether or not the image be included, and that its "rawness" perfectly depicts the act in all its (objectively knowable) resultant horror. --User:Corvun 19:34, 20 Feb 2005 (UTC) ::I think that you should consider taking back that last part. It's not a very good or civil thing to do, to put words into people's mouths, and in saying "If someone ''doesn't'' want this picture in the article, ''this'' is the only reason they could possibly have" you're not only putting words in people's mouths, in many cases you're doing it before they've even joined the discussion. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 00:59, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC) :::Sorry, forgot the
I would also point out that, given the place and time of origin of that image, its original intent was presumably as an erotic drawing, not a moral warning. I doubt whether we should be in the business of providing titillating images for people who are excited by the idea of rape.
I also echo Paul B's point about snuff movies: just because we are very liberal in our attitude to images does not mean there should not be any limits. -- User:The Anome 16:34, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC) :Just to test the logic of the image's proponents, by ''reductio ad absurdam'', do they advocate that if someone can find a more horrifying image, its depiction in this article will be more moral in its aversive effect? Do they really argue this, or will they stop short of making this argument? (I would say that they deliberately chose the current image because its age, style of drawing and cultural distance somehow made it "tasteful" enough to have some chance of being retained on the page). After some thought, I think "trolling" might just be the right word for this activity.
Just to let everyone know, I've posted the image on images for deletion. -- User:The Anome 16:52, Feb 21, 2005 (UTC)
Thank you. I don't agree w you, and would actually like to see all 3 images discussed aded to the article, but I do appreciate you becomming involved in the talk page here. Cheers, (User:Sam Spade | user_talk:Sam Spade | Special:contributions/Sam Spade) 16:59, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
::This is an article on rape. Just because rape is shocking doesn't justify it's censorship. I strongly disagree with it and find it similiar to book burning. Plus some would say the image is informing while others would say the entire article including text is shocking. Everything depends on how the viewer defines it. One person's art is anothers pornography. User:Apollomelos 17:34, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
:::The Anome: My original intent was not as you saw it. It was to illustrate and communicate.
:::Antaeus Feldspar: I accept your critique, it was an error for me to reach for political corectness. But your critique applies to the caption, not to the image. I disagree with the position that articles on touchy subjects should not be illustrated. It is just a question of how.
:::Paul Barlow: My apologies for my dogmatism, especially vis a vis someone with more seniority in the field. In refuting the label of pornography I was applying the Miller test. Outside of that of course it becomes a matter of opinion. My accusation of "nannying" came from your comment that: ''My main worry is that having a graphic visual depiction of rape will seem to be either titillating or deliberately provocative and grotesque by some readers. I don't think we should encourage such responses.'' I think you take on too much responsibility for a reader's response. Everyone will respond differently, and we are under no obligation to protect some from their sexual arousal and others from their reaction of revulsion. This is a revolting topic to most, titillating to some. Had I tried to insert the image into an article about the history of eyeglasses your concerns would make more sense to me.
:::I have removed the image from the article in the hope we can arrive at some approximation of consensus here first. User:Haiduc 19:45, 21 Feb 2005 (UTC)
::::Just a note to let all know that I am not going to pursue this matter further. While I (and apparently most of the participants here) think the image would enrich the article, I do not intend to post it in the face of unresolved strong objections. User:Haiduc 00:13, 25 Feb 2005 (UTC)
I have a thought. Perhaps this image, which most of the contributors here feel is appropriate to the article, would be a lot ''more'' appropriate in a more specialized location than right at the top of the page. I'm certain there must be a better place to put an artistic depiction of a rape scene. I was thinking under a "depictions of rape in media" section, which as yet does not exist, but would surely benefit the article. Thoughts? --User:Corvun 00:40, Feb 26, 2005 (UTC)
:I would (of course) support that alternative. User:Haiduc 23:06, 26 Feb 2005 (UTC)
== Rape in marriage, legal peronae ==
The article currently states the following on rape in marriage:
:''Forced sex by a husband against his wife was not considered rape, or even a crime, throughout most of history, since as part of the marriage both partners were deemed to have given implicit informed consent in advance to a lifelong sexual relationship.''
I'd like to note that until recently (in common law countries) a married woman was the same legal person as her husband. She was unable to consent (or withold consent). She was unable, legally and economically, to prosecute rape. Any objections? Comments?User:AnnaAniston 05:17, 4 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:If it's true, why not note it? --User:Corvun 10:06, Mar 4, 2005 (UTC)
== The "Statutory rape" section ==
Summary of my recent changes:
(Quotes are from the previous version)
"Some individuals, such as minors and the incapacitated, are considered unable to give consent, and therefore to have sex with them is always rape. "
I took out the part about the incapacitated, since that is dealt with elsewhere in the rape article and was not directly relevent to this section, which dealt with violations of age of consent laws. I also added a subject (governments) to the sentence - so as to change it from passive to active voice and make clear just who was doing the considering. I switched the word "minors" to "people under a certain age" to avoid ambiguity. The word "minor" can have a number of different meanings, for example in the state of Kansas a person can legally have sex at age 16, is generally considered to be fully an adult by age 18, but can still be charged as a "minor in possession of alcohol" up until age 21.
"Because the state has an interest in protecting minors, it declares that children under a certain age are not able to give informed consent."
This seemed to be asserting a POV, so I changed to to make clear that it was the state, not Wikipedia, who was making that assertion.
"Laws vary widely in their definitions of statutory rape; some states make exceptions when the perpetrator is also young or of a similar age..."
"Perpetrator," IMO, is a very loaded word and most certainly not NPOV. I feel it was particuarlly inappropriate in this case, when the state doesn't even say that the person has done anything wrong. (Is a 19 year old who has sex with his 17 year old girlfriend a perpetrator?)
--User:Blackcats 23:46, 8 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:Yes, and he can go to jail, as happened a number of years ago in wisconsin while I was there. Trivializes real rape if you ask me, but the US has an off relationship w sex. (User:Sam Spade | user_talk:Sam Spade | Special:contributions/Sam Spade) 00:08, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
::Many liberal states have provisions for such cases. If one person is above the age of consent and another below, most states would not consider it a crime unless they were a certain number of months or years apart. For example, a 21 year old can usually (as I understand it) have sex with anyone 17 or over, whereas for a 22 year old, anyone under 18 is off-limits. If both parties are under 18, there usually has to be 36 months difference between them before the oldest can be charged with a crime. In other words, it's usually legal for a nearly 17 year old to have sex with a 14 and a half year old, but a 17 and a half year old could not legally have sex with someone who just turned 14. Then again, it seems like these laws change every couple of months. In my own state we used to go by the 36 month rule, then the age of consent dropped to 16 instead of 18 and a 3 month rule was adopted concerning those under 16. I have no idea what the law is now. --User:Corvun 03:32, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
:::The distinction drawn between child molestation and statutory rape does not make sense to me. Here is a quote about Massachusetts law:
In this Commonwealth, statutory rape is outlawed by Massachusetts General Law Chapter 265: Section 23 (Rape and Abuse of a Child):
Whoever unlawfully has sexual intercourse or unnatural sexual intercourse, and abuses a child under sixteen years of age shall, for the first offense, be punished by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years, or, except as otherwise provided, for any term in jail or house of correction, and for the second or subsequent offense by imprisonment in the state prison for life or for any term of years, but not less than five years. User:Haiduc 03:54, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:I think the general idea is that after a certain age (usually in the pre-teen or early teen years) you may very well know what sex is, and you'll certainly ''want'' to have sex, but you don't yet have the psychological maturity to make careful choices concerning sex. A 14 year old girl is sexually mature in the biological sense and capable of bearing children with little to no personal health risk. She is capable of ''wanting'' sex. Yet, at the same time, the average 14 year old girl is incapable of making rational choices as to ''who'' she has sex with. She can be easily taken advantage of, and usually only ''thinks'' she's making her own choices, when in fact someone older and smarter than her is manipulating and leading her. She can succumb to a predator's sweet talk and her own biological urges without being able to give her "true consent". (Although this is a more complicated matter; it's concievable that an exceptionally intelligent and mature 14 year old might actually be capable of making such choices for herself without being taken advantage of, whereas there are probably a number of very naive and emotionally immature women who will ''never'' reach a point that they are able to truly make their own decisions regarding sex, and will spend their entire lives being led and manipulated by one cad after another.)
:Those that have not yet biologically reached sexual maturity, on the other hand, aren't even capable of really ''wanting'' sex without manipulation. They aren't thought to really understand what sex is.
:So I can see why there would be a distinction. "Molestation" being the term for taking advantage of someone incapable of ''wanting'' sex, and "statutory rape" being the term for someone who may ''want'' sex, but isn't mature enough to decide ''with whom''. --User:Corvun 05:11, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
Age of consent is a complex and arbitrary matter. God (or nature, or whatever) gave us clear physical distinctions between those who can breed, and those who cannot, age-wise. Anything else is purely cultural in nature. Also children of every age have sexual inclinations, as any psychology or human sexuality student can tell you. See child sexuality. The article needs to be completely without judgement on these matters, as anything else smacks of ethnocentrism. One thing that is clear to me is that every culture has rules regarding sex which, when viewed by some other specific outside culture, appear obscene. The clear distinctions regarding rape are:
# Injury
# Consent
And cases where either is open to interpretation are distinctly less clear cut than those where they are not. (User:Sam Spade | user_talk:Sam Spade | Special:contributions/Sam Spade) 10:12, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
:I agree somewhat that the age of consent is arbitrary. Once someone has reached sexual maturity, it is only a cultural matter whether or not that person is capable of giving consent. As I stated earlier, some are undoubtedly emotionally/psychologically mature enough to make rational choices regarding sex almost as soon as they are sexually mature, while others may never reach this point. It really has very little to do with age after sexual maturity, and more to do with the individual. While I do think it is possible to be sexually mature (biologically) yet psychologically unable to give consent, I also think it's pretty silly to think there's a magical age at which someone lacking the emotional/psychological maturity to make his/her own choices and not be led around like a piece on some kind of sexual game board, will somehow mystically turn into someone capable of ''actually'' consenting to a sexual act with a specific person.
:I didn't mean to imply that children don't have sexual urges or inclinations. Humans must have strong sexual instincts, like all animals, and it makes sense to see some manifestations of those instincts even in early childhood. I personally would think, though, that there's a big difference between simply knowing that a certain movement or stimulus feels good, as in very young children, and making serious attempts to contribute to the gene pool, as in young teens and up. Not to say there's a clear line. Like all forms of human growth, the change takes place over a period of time.
:But, all of this is moot anyway, since it seems we're making a pretty similar argument. --User:Corvun 11:50, Mar 9, 2005 (UTC)
::I was not questioning the logic (sounds perfectly reasonable that you should treat relations with a twelve year old differently from relations with a two year old) but actual law, which is what we are reporting here. If I read Massachusetts law correctly, they make no distinction. In their eyes too young is too young and distinctions be damned. So it seems to me that at the very least we should discuss two different categories of law, jurisdictions where a distinctions IS made between molestation and statutory rape, and those where everything is lumped together. I really have no idea where the preponderance of law falls, but my take on US law is that there is less rather than more distinction. User:Haiduc 11:38, 9 Mar 2005 (UTC)
== Text dump ==
===Overreporting and false reporting===
Figures vary wildly on the issue of false reporting. Serious estimates of the prevalence of false reporting range from as low as 2% and as high as 60%, and figures as high and as low as 0% and 100% are actually commonly stated.
In 1994, Dr. Eugene J. Kanin of Purdue University investigated the incidences in one small metropolitan community of false rape allegations made to the police between 1978 and 1987. In this study, cases were declared false based on the recantations of the complainants. In addition, a complainant who recanted their allegation was informed that they would be charged with filing a false complaint, punishable by fines and by jail time; even when advised of this, no complainant retracted their recantation. The report indicated that these complaints were considered "suspect" at the time of the complaint or within a day or two after charging, and that none of the detectives involved believed that an incident of false recantation has occurred. Under these conditions, the number of false rape allegations in the studied period was 41% of the 109 total complaints filed.
Dr. Kanin's research took place in a small community of 70,000 where the overall crime rate was low enough that each of the 109 cases in question could be thoroughly investigated, including a serious offer to polygraph both the complainant and the accused. The complainants who made false allegations were reported to have done so (by their own statements during recantation) for three major reasons: providing an alibi, a means of gaining revenge, and/or a platform for seeking attention/sympathy.
Some public voices still assert that false reports are rare. In 1999, after a series of four high profile attacks against women at University of Massachusetts, the last of which was recanted by the accuser, the director of Everywoman's Center at University of Massachusetts Amherst, Carol Wallace, told ''The Boston Globe'': "One of the myths, about sexual assault in particular, is that women do make false reports. It is rare and this incident in no way minimizes the validity of the other reports."
=== Victim blaming ===
"Victim blaming" is holding the victim of a crime to be in whole or in part responsible for what has happened to them. For example a motorist who leaves his/her car unlocked with the keys in the ignition may be held partly responsible if the car is stolen. A person who uses verbal abuse may be held partly responsible if they become a victim of a physical assault. In the context of rape, this concept refers to attitudes that behaviour such as flirting or wearing sexually provocative clothing may encourage rape: that they are analagous to leaving ones car with the keys in the ignition or provoking an assault by "winding up" the assailant. In extreme cases victims are accused of "asking for it" by not behaving demurely.
In most Western countries the legal defence of provocation is not accepted in mitigation of rape. Many commentators emphasise that victim blaming in rape cases justifies the restriction of women's freedoms and encourages the under reporting of the crime. However, Camile Paglia and some sociobiology have argued that victim blaming should not be entirely dismissed. This is a very controversial view. In some countries victim blaming is believed to be more widely accepted; women who have been raped are deemed to have behaved improperly.
It has been proposed that one cause of victim blaming is the so-called "Just World Hypothesis". This hypothesis states that people who are inclined to believe the world is a just place cannot accept a situation in which a person is hurt badly and cannot be made well by any means. In order for the world to still be a just place the victim must have done something to deserve their fate.
Victim blame is believed by some to be responsible for many of the accusations regarding false reporting of sexual assault. It has been suggested that victim blaming is one explaination for the [http://www.rainn.org/statistics.html#silent low reporting rate for sexual assault].
----
The above text is being dumped out of Rape/temp1, so that that page can be cleared and deleted. There may be some information that other editors would be interested in adding to the article. -User:Willmcw 00:52, Mar 22, 2005 (UTC)
== Fighting the deliteralization of "rape" ==
Pakaran, any chance you could give some details on this item you added: "and this
- ''"The wood had been raped of its peace"''. (From a book, of disturbance caused by a foxhunt in a forest)
- ''"The rape of England"''. (A newspaper article headline with a pun referring to the rapeseed plant self-seeding on waste ground and motorway verges.)
User:Anthony Appleyard 22:04, 14 May 2005 (UTC)
== Changes to usage section by magicalspirits ==
Greetings, I didn’t realize when I made the edits to this page the ediquite involved. After a year of using wikipedia I’ve never before edited an article, nor have I looked at the conversation page. That being said, the usage section of this particular page struck something that caused me to break out the editor and spend an hour finding what I felt were the right words.
Perhaps we can work together to create a broder definition that fits the need better?
:''In internet culture the term is sometimes used as a dysphemism reference to having one's online writings voted/moderated downwards by a large number of people.''
:''has always struck a bad chord with me because I've never seen it used this way. Ever. Not even on Slashdot. I don't doubt that ''someone'' out there uses it this way, but is it a specific and significant enough usage to merit singling out here?'':
To tell you the truth, neither have I, and I nearly smoked the passage when I was editing it, but someone put it there for some reason, and I didn’t want to silence their voice. I would give it a +1 to drop it if others feel similarly.
:''I also see problems with User:Magicalspirits' recent [http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rape&diff=11848071&oldid=11846560 change] to this section. Does it express a particular POV well? Yes. Does it do so in an NPOV manner? It doesn't; it asserts that the use of "rape" as a dysphemism "creates a decoupling within our language of the horror associated with this term", which is certainly a reasonable belief but ''isn't'' one held by everyone. '':
While that may be the case, is there an NPOV way to describe this concept in such a way that victims and survivors of rape will not feel demeaned? In this particular case it felt natural to err on the side empowerment of those who have been harmed by rape. I'm open to discussion on this topic.
:'' Likewise, changing "is usually considered" to "is considered" asserts that ''everyone'' considers it demeaning or disempowering of rape victims -- untrue unless you try to assert that all the people who do use "rape" as a dysphemism are ''intentionally'' demeaning and disempowering rape victims, an extraordinary claim with no supporting evidence. '':
You bring up a good point. Often times the people using the term rape in as a dysphemism are not cognizant of the harm that they may be doing with the word in a similar way to how those that use the current popular phrase "That is so gay" are often entirely unaware of the sexual slur they are using. I'm trying to track down a similar article I read that articulated gracefully a similar situation about how people using that term do not know or intend to use it to demean or disempower.
I'm certainly open to ideas on how to rephrase this section in an empowering and NPOV way. -- UUser:Magicalspirits
== Added SectNPOV to "Drugging" ==
This IP User ''edit war / vandalism / disruptive behaviour'' is boring and needs to stop. Please direct comments, cites and attempts at consensus to the talk page. User:AnnaAniston 05:40, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
:I just reverted POV vandalism by another IP User. The Suday Mail article cited by an earlier editor [http://www.thesundaymail.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5936,6766753%255E1702,00.html] was of course only really directly relevant to the Perth, Australia area, and could not by itself be reasonably extrapolated to mean much of anything about the rest of the world. I do think though that the section should proably be expanded so as to adress some of the compexities of the drugging issue, such as drugging with concentrated alcohol and severe alcohol intoxication sometimes being mistaken for drugging. I'd say more research is in order... --User:Blackcats 22:11, 11 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::Comparing the article to its summary in Rape#Drugging, there's an additional problem; the summary claims that these were 44 "'drug rape' cases", whereas the article just says that they were 44 women who believed that they had had their drinks spiked. The two of course are not the same. The summary also omits the important factor that there were apparently media reports of a drink-spiking "epidemic" in the area.
::Nevertheless, our old friend the drive-by anon, who refuses all talk page discussion, keeps trying to remove any reference to this incident and replace it with unsupported assertions that there ''is'' an international "drink-spiking epidemic". This is inappropriate on at least two counts, one of course being that no evidence has been submitted that an "epidemic" is occurring; the other is that even if the summary is exaggerated, it's making some very good points. It's easy to mistake the effects of too much alcohol for drink-spiking, especially if someone's been telling you there's a drink-spiker around every corner. And if forensic tests such as the ones that ruled out drink-spiking in these 44 cases aren't being done in ''all'' cases, then there is good reason to suspect that the incidence of drink-spiking might be getting overestimated. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 00:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::[http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Rape&diff=0&oldid=12187649 You see what I mean...] -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 01:10, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
:::[http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Vandalism_in_progress#24.222.246.133_and_70.241.117.179_and_68.72.20.192 Reported IP vandals]. I think this behaviour goes beyond NPOV dispute, newbie testing, and stubborness referred to in WP:-( User:220.244.224.204 03:31, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC) - Sorry, that's me (session logged out) User:AnnaAniston 03:32, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
I've reverted it once again (forgot to login before hand), and I agree with both of you that this is indeed vandalism. If anyone sees anything resembling these two sentences there: "Drugging victims is unethical and illegal. Many countries are currently working hard to put a stop to the date rape drug epidemic." Then they need to be reverted ASAP. There's no evidence that I've seen that there's a global date rape drug "epidemic." That word is very subjective at any rate. If someone wants to write an article about date rape drugging, then they could mention in that article that some groups in some places feel that there is an "epidemic" there (and cite sources). Also the "unethical" is very inapropriate. Of course I, like most people, do consider drugging to be very unethical, but it's not Wikipedia's place to say what is or isn't ethical. User:Blackcats 04:00, 12 Apr 2005 (UTC)
:Well, it's now been protected. (Pity it's protected on the version ''with'' that unsupported reference to an "epidemic"...) Let's see if we can take the various statements under dispute individually and see whether we can come to consensus on whether they should go in, stay out, or be modified. I've listed some below with my own take on them. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 01:36, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
''particularly those who are also necrophiliacs,''
:My take: this is somebody's guesswork, laden perhaps with a desire to demonize. Does it make an intuitive sort of sense to think that if someone ''was'' a necrophiliac inclined to rape the living as well, they might prefer to do so by drugging their victims? Sure. Is the number of necrophiliacs in the world, let alone the fraction of necrophiliacs inclined to rape the living, a population that has really been scientifically studied enough to make a statement such as this one? I doubt it. And what the statement actually ''says'' is not that most necrophiliac rapists are drug rapists -- but that most drug rapists are necrophiliacs. Without any cited research, this should be taken out. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 01:36, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::I agree - I've never seen any connection whatsoever between those who use date rape drugs and necrophilia. If anything, such a connection is potentially dangerous in that necrophilia is a recognized mental disorder in DSM-IV, and such a connection could potentially lead to a defense of not guilty by reason of mental defect.User:Tufflaw 03:19, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
''It is imperative that any investigation into the suspected use of date rape drugs involve the taking of blood from the victim and an immediate test of the blood, as the length of time between the taking of the blood and the testing for these drugs results in a degradation of the drug in the blood, even after it has been drawn.''
:My take: This is almost there; but there are two things missing: first of all, what is it imperative ''for''? Second of all, if the answer is "to insure that the degradation of the drugs in the bloodstream don't generate a false negative" I think I'd like to see some sort of medical support for that statement, indicating just what sort of timeframes we're talking about.
:I suspect, since our old friend the drive-by anon has been around, that this might be lead-up to another attempt to deny the existence of false positives: 'Those 44 women whose forensic tests showed absolutely no signs of drink-spiking ''really were'' drugged; they just waited too long.' 'Those 45 women who told the police they had invented their earlier reports of rape ''must have'' been lying when they ''retracted'' their reports, not when they made them.' If we can get actual concrete fact on how fast the evidence of drugging disappears from the system, we can put it in. If we can then what are we doing putting in conclusions, or worse yet imperatives, drawn from facts not in evidence? -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 01:36, 13 Apr 2005 (UTC)
::I added that bit, drawing on my own personal experience as an assistant district attorney in a recent rape case I was handling - blood was drawn from the victim almost immediately after the rape however it was not tested for date rape drugs because there was no suspect. A DNA match located the rapist several years later however by then it was too late to test the blood. I was informed by the toxologist in the medical examiner's office that these drugs degrade very quickly and therefore the blood needs to be tested immediately.User:Tufflaw 03:19, Apr 13, 2005 (UTC)
:::Tufflaw, could you maybe get in touch with that toxicologist (or with another, of course) and ask for any established standards there are about how soon the sampling needs to be done to get reliable results, and how fast the reliability drops after the optimal period? It'd be useful information to have in the article. -- User:Antaeus Feldspar 03:41, 14 Apr 2005 (UTC)
The "dissenting text": ''Date rape drugs cause victims to lose consciousness and memory, which rapists use to their advantage to attack their victims while their victims are defenseless and incapacitated. Drugging victims is unethical and illegal. Many countries are currently working hard to put a stop to the date rape drug epidemic.''
The problem with the "dissenting text" is that it is unsubtantiated and expressed with weasel-words. There are three concepts being argued (paraphrased):
#rapists use spiking to gain or fudge consent - this is the reason a rapist may ''render ... victims unconscious''. The ''lack of consent'' is what makes any sexual act in this context a ''rape''.
#drug-rape is unethical and illegal and many countries are working to stop date rape - these are weasel-words; this point should be retained with reference to specific ethics, specific laws and specific countries. For example, is it ethical or legal to drug-rape in the USA? If no, then the point is validated.
#there is a rape drug epidemic - for this claim to stand as it is, it would need to be supported by evidence. This point could be expanded by reference to scare-mongering surrounding drug-rape, and could link well into the Perth study. For example: "(source 1) says that drug-rape has grown to epidemic proportions, however (source 2) states that mounting awareness of drug-rape may be due to its convenience as an internet myth ... in the Perth study of 44 cases it was found that ..."
This section needs to incorporate bot