Talk:Rape/Archive 6

message: If you made the plea for help in the "To do" section of the box above, I have responded to you at the bottom of this page, under the header titled "Plea for help".  --  Joie de Vivre 19:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)

message: The sociobiology section reads (at least to me) very much like pseudoscience and rape apology.  Suggesting that perhaps some humans (presumably women) make themselves "more available" to rape? Also, this opinion is put forth by Camille Paglia, who is not a sociobiologist but a social critic.  This section seems extremely biased, if not dangerous to include for social reasons (giving people reason to justify a brutal crime).  Paglia is speaking outside of her field and is being portrayed as an expert.  None of the sociobiologists who share her opinion are referenced.  Is it possible for someone to remove or edit this section?    —Preceding unsigned comment added by Alison88 (talk • contribs) 02:04, 13 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sociobiology? 

message: Can we specify which sections are under dispute? I see that many sections are quite encyclopedic, while a few others need work. Specific labels in those sections would aid editors in improving the article.
Not to mention it makes the top of the page ugly. Xiner (talk, email) 16:31, 11 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My first thoughts: The Effects and role of control sections need citations. Prevalence and reports and Media attention need to expand beyond the U.S. and a few specific incidents. Maybe that's too many tags to put in one article, so maybe a to-do box on the talk page? Also if you know any WikiProjects, that might help. Xiner (talk, email) 16:36, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

text: Also, in the Statistics section, it is calculated that "there is only a 16.3% chance the rapist will end up in prison". It should be "accused rapist". If maybe 1/2 of accusations are false, as the article suggests, the change of a rapist going to prison should be closer to 32.016%.134.173.56.14 01:02, 20 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Adding balance 

message: There's no mention of whether the studies were peer-reviewed, or even where they are published. The numbers sound alarmist too (50%?). I'm not sure the data are reliable. Xiner (talk, email) 16:47, 19 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I guess I wasn't aware that false reporting is a problem. I think this post is more enlightening than the above article, though. Xiner (talk, email) 16:58, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

text: http://www.anandaanswers.com/pages/naaFalse.html http://www.questia.com/PM.qst?a=o&d=5001659224&er=deny these are by a professor at purdue. He found 41% recanted in a town, and that 50% recanted when looking at two midwwestern state universites. http://www.ipt-forensics.com/journal/volume6/j6_2_4.htm This is from a journal and looks at various studies done by other people. http://archives.cjr.org/year/97/6/rape.asp heres an article from columbia journalism review. A SIGNIFICANT number of rape allegations reported to the police in the United States are FALSE. I'm gonna put significant back into the page. Please look at the Rape Reporting page on wikipedia, it goes into this in much more detail.  Qvkfgmjqy 00:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: You are quoting one obscure study.  Until further studies are done this is not proof positive that 50% of all rape allegations that make there way to police stations are false.  Furthermore, it is a leap of faith to say that withdrawling a charge of rape is the same as recanting an allegation of rape.  Your data is simply flawed. 01:32, 27 February 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  The [http://www.americanchronicle.com/articles/viewArticle.asp?articleID=18108 new link] 

message: Do we really need 72 "further readings" here?  When too many are in the in the list, the important ones are not emphasized.  We could list every book or article every written about this subject, but that is not Wikipedia's function and in this case, the article would be absurdly long, and it would confuse readers.  This should be an overview article.
If all of these sources were in fact used to create the article, they should appear as refs so a reader will know which book access to either verify a specific claim, or to find further reading on a specific claim.  The list of refs could then be as long as we like (within reason).  Assistance from frequent contributors or long-time authors to this article would be very greatly appreciated.  Ufwuct 23:47, 29 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  EXCESSIVE Further readings 

message: When I first saw this page the world in the introduction before "sex crimes" was "fun". I changed it to serious, although I'm not sure what it's really supposed to be, but obviously not "fun".129.100.195.105 21:54, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: "Serious" is right – thanks for helping. This article is a moderately popular target for vandals who apparently seek to enrage the most readers they can by "making fun of a serious subject". Such vandalism is usually removed quickly. –Henning Makholm 21:55, 25 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Changed Word 

message: The Duke University lacrosse team scandal (and its discussion page) could use some expertise on rape, victims, reporting, etc. Any expert input would be appreciated. Please be aware that it's a controversial issue and choose your words carefully! Thanks. Guanxi 05:21, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Off topic - could use input re Duke rape case 

message: The structure of this article could do with a little work. What we have now is: 
::1 History of rape - link to a "main article" 
::2 Definitions of rape  
::3 Types of rape - link to a "main article" 
::4 Effect of rape - link to a "main article" 
::5 Sociobiological analysis of rape - link to a "main article" 
::6 Loss of control and privacy 
::7 Challenges to conventional assumptions - link to a "main article" 
::8 College campus rape 
::9 Media Attention 
One thing I'd suggest fixing is the absence of a section outlining rape statistics (i.e. the size of the issue) - the main article linked from "Challenges to conventional assumptions" is actually about rape statistics, so I'm thinking of renaming that and moving the heading up to before the section on "Effect of rape". And the section on "college campus rape" looks to me like it should be a separate article linked from a section within "Types of rape". I'll make those two changes. (later edit) It's now:
::1 History of rape - link to a "main article" 
::2 Definitions of rape  
::3 Types of rape - link to a "main article" 
::4 Rape statistics - link to a "main article" 
::5 Effect of rape - link to a "main article" 
::6 Sociobiological analysis of rape - link to a "main article" 
::7 Loss of control and privacy 
::8 Media Attention 
What do other people think? VSerrata 14:34, 3 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree.  I think that college rape can be an article of it's own (I can't find that subtitle now however?) and loss of control and privacy isn't very necessary for the entry, it is a more appropriate topic to be addressed on a different website.  I also think the entry section needs to be cut down, and "Rape is a form of assault involving the non-consensual use of the sexual organs of another person's body. The assailant can be of either sex, as can their target." is a very weak entry to the article.  I do not think the first thing to address in an article about rape is the fact that rapists can be male or female (which is a controversial stance according to some sociologists given how rape occurs).  An entry line like "Rape is a violent sex crime which transends class, culture, race, and gender barriers" might be better.  67.175.172.127 05:19, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Section headings 

message: The following comment was added to Talk:Rape/to do.  I have placed it here and replied below.
:I am not sure how you deal with being raped. This is something that I have had to endure since I was 5 years old and was abused by a male babysitter. I was then raped at the age of 17 by a friend. I am now 26, I have a six year old son and a partner of 5 years whom I love very much. Last Christmas I was raped again by my partners brother in law. My son witnessed part of this attack. My attacker apologised to me after he did what he did to me. I have only just told my partner this weekend what happened to me. I told him because I got upset at a family party and needed to get out all the feelings that I had. At the time of the rape I had had alot to drink after being in town having a few drinks to celebrate the chrstmas break. When I got home that night I had a few more to drink.
:This man was so close to our family as he had been like a father to my partner after his own dad passed away. We got on with him very well and had no reason not to trust him. He abused our trust and I fweel so ashamed that I was too drunk to stop it.
:I never reported this to the police. Even now I don't know what to do. I am worried that I will not be believed. I am very close to this mans wife ( My partners sister) and they have children whom I know this would devastate.
:What can I do???
I am so sorry to hear that you have suffered for so long.  Luckily, you don't have to suffer anymore; you can get help today.  Please don't allow your son to witness you being abused.  Please call RAINN, the Rape Abuse and Incest National Network.  Their toll-free hotline is 1-800-656-4673.  It's a free call from any phone.  RAINN can connect you with resources in your area that can help you and your son to be safe.  If you want to read about this organization before you call, RAINN's website is http://www.rainn.org/  
Because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, editors tend to stay on the topic of articles.  As much as you deserve help and support, not many people on a Wikipedia talk page will reply to a post that is not about an article.  Fortunately, someone at the RAINN hotline is waiting for your call.  Something else you could try is looking in your phone book for "Rape" or "Sexual assault" resources.  Don't wait to get help, things can start getting better now, if you ask for help today.  Don't let your little boy see one more violent act, call them right now.  Joie de Vivre 19:53, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Could we add a notice at the top pointing people in the direction of a help forum? Richard001 00:54, 18 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plea for help 

message: Pioneering researchers are beginning the challenge the cunning, covert, and ugly ideologies of 'gender'-feminism that mythologize female innocence and create baseless hysteria about all men as "patriarchal" rapists (as in the Duke Lacrosse players scandal where an inane rush to judgement almost resulted in the rape of justice).  This article is from the editor of the groundbreaking book Sexually Aggressive Women.  Hats off to courageous women who take this taboo topic on....especially when men are too ashamed (or too chicken) to tackle it head on.  I urge editors who hope to create a NPOV article about rape to consider the POV points psychologist Struckman-Johnson raises here in Sex, Violence and Research 128.111.95.47 04:47, 13 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Suppression of Politically Incorrect research and reporting about rape 

message: There is no support for this claim:
"The modern feminist movement in its zeal to show female victimization by male rapists has often overlooked female rapists who rape men or women."
This is like accusing Martin Luther King of ignoring the civil rights of Asians in his zeal to stop the civil rights abuses of black people.  
Do we really believe the feminist movement intentionally ignored the rape of women by men, or could it be that such cases constitute a neglible percentage of rapes?  All of the feminists I know support the rights of all human beings not to be sexually assaulted regardless of gender.  One of the most important things feminism did was to challenge male dominated law enforcement agencies and courts who let rape go unpunished.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by 155.246.89.74 (talk • contribs).
::You're right 155.246.89.74 that statement is original research and is unsourced.  Unless it can be sourced it needs to be removed.--Cailil  talk 20:15, 22 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Feminist zeal? 

message: The paragraph about orangutans is unclear and uncited. It says young males rape, but then it says males remain in the trees and call to females. I'm assuming what is meant here is mature males. The bit about killing infants is not in scientific language and I question whether it is appropriate there at all. If it could be shown that female orangutans regularly kill offspring resulting from rape, that would be useful data, but what is there right now sounds like an opinion.Bifemmefatale 17:52, 1 May 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree with you: that paragraph was weird, unreferenced, and just seemed like someone was trying to promote an agenda (and not very clearly at that). I have removed it. I've also removed a claim about women's ability to conceive under stress that was referenced to some website called "Holistic Online", as per WP:RS, and a claim about the desirability of female choice that was researched to an undergraduate assignment. Particularly on articles like this, which are obviously controversial, it's incredibly important to have things referenced to proper reliable sources. -- TinaSparkle 09:37, 2 May 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Sociobiological section 

message: The causes of rape section needs attention by an expert. There are several serious problems with it, among which:
1) Correlational studies are presented as causal findings. This is Highly Problematic.
2) Drugs may disinhibit behavior, but they cannot be considered causes of behavior in a strict sense. Most drunk or drugged people do not rape. More subtlety is needed in discussing the correlational findings on drugs and alcohol.
3) The section cites studies out of context. It refers to specific studies without metion of the populations studied, when they were studied, in what settings. The claims made, in the form of overly simplistic percentages, may not refer to anyone outside of the studies mentioned. 
4) Instead of simplisticly referring to drugs and alcohol and interpreting correlations as causes, the article should list the top several factors that have been studied and make a statement about the extent of the strength of evidence for each factor. It should refer to the highest quality qualitative and quantitative literature reviews in the field.
5) Religious institutions are not authorities on the causes of human behavior; references to religious institutions' lay attributions to the causes of behavior are not encyclopedic material and should be moved to a separate section on the religious views on rape.
 -P  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Blagov (talk • contribs) 15:03, 4 April 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Several problems with "causes of rape" section