Many have taken issue with the definition of sexual assault.
People believe that, by including assaults in which drugs or alcohol were involved, that people are being unfairly accused of assault when it was “just a bad hookup.”
Christina Hoff Sommers has been continually campaigning against a study by Mary Koss, which was written in the 70s. The study contained a question which asked, “Have you ever been in a sexual situation in which you felt it was unwanted” (I’m paraphrasing—will edit later when I can locate my copy of the study), and based off of the amount of people she asked (3,800), she came up with the statistic of 1 in 5 women.
Now, instead of investigating further to debunk Koss’s study, conservatives, anti-feminists, & co., chose to nitpick Koss’s study which has only further been backed up by the sources that have already been listed above.
So, I guess it ultimately matters if you believe acquaintance rape is a thing, or not. The Obama-era definition of sexual assault, which includes incidents in which drugs or alcohol were imbibed, has, in my opinion, allowed women to discern the difference between “bad sex” (aka two consenting adults just not figuring out the rhythm of the other, and so forth), and flat-out sexual assault, which is incredibly empowering.
There have been cases in which false reports have been made and I will never deny that. But do I believe that the Obama-era disrupted the lives of young men everywhere? Absolutely not. Less than 8% of cases reported to the police are false. And most false reports are made against an unnamed stranger, not someone known to the person reporting. Of course I believe there should be zero false reports. But I do believe the “male witch hunt” suggested by the later party is highly inflated.
There is currently no study to prove the later, and if one is found, I’d be interested to read it.
Some points of reference I would look at would be: