AP interview excerpts from "Randall" and "Andy"

I was telling you to look at the judgments of the people who do the research you were disussing and how you were incorrect in your interpretation of said results. You appear to still be incorrect.

No, you were telling me I should agree with their value judgements, quite a different animal, and one in which their authority is completely meaningless.

And here is their definition for completed sexual coercion:

Unwanted completed penetration with the threat of noncoercion physical punishment, promise of reward, or pestering/verbal pressure. Penetration includes: penile-vaginal, mouth on your genitals, mouth on someone else’s genitals, penile-anal, digital-vaginal, digital-anal, object-vaginal, and object-anal.

Their definition of Completed Rape makes no mention of alcohol. It's specfically reforcing to force and threat of force.

And if you look at the other categories, they don't mention alcohol either. That is because the study considers taking advantage of a drunk person "using force." This would be clear to you if you actually read the survey questions, or actually read the study. Read the survey questions and the actual study before trying to claim they aren't lumping in drunken, regretful sex with "completed rape."

I actually agree that taking advantage of an incapacitated person is ethically equivalent to force, the the wording of the survey is extremely broad and leans towards the recent "any alcohol = incapacitation" or "regret the next day = incapacitation" interpretations which only exacerbate the lack of agency felt by women and encourage patriarchal, condescending attitudes towards "the weaker sex."

Also, back to the other horrendous methodological flaws:

They didn't double it, they adjusted it to fit the entire year to paint a picture of what the figure may look like for the entire year, not just the time at school. People do get raped outside of colleges, y'know. Additionally, they didn't double it. The figure they give was ~2.8%. They appear to have divided it by 6.9 to get their monthly figure and multiplied it by 12 to get a yearly one.

Even if they followed your methodology of multiplying that figure by 8 still gives you 22.8%, which is uh, you know, pretty damn close to the 1 in 4 figure you're so upset about.

Pretty sure you're being deliberately obtuse here. I'll go step by step:

  1. If your trying to claim there is an epidemic of X on college campuses then you should really only try to measure X on college campuses.

  2. The average college student is only on campus about 8 months/year, and likely slightly less.

  3. The survey admitted many women were victims of multiple attacks in the same year, yet assumed that no woman was ever the victim of both an attempted rape and a completed rape, and that no woman was ever a victim two years in a row.

  4. The survey only

/r/UVA Thread Link - youtube.com