time mag article "Sexual Assault Crisis on American campuses"

<ol>
<li> Don’t get drunk (applies to both sexes)</li>
<li> Don’t be around drunks (applies to both sexes)</li>
</ol>

<p>I wouldn’t want anyone too drunk to speak a one-syllable word to handle a gun.</p>

<p>

[quote]
I bet the majority of women have been bruised on a date (/quote]
I don’t have stats but I sure hope not, unless you mean “bruised ego”, not “bruised flesh”.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Nope, don’t agree with this at all. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That’s not the use case anyone’s talking about. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Fortunately, statistics directly contradict your hunch.</p>

<p>May I recommend one suggestion - when stating something like statistics directly contradict a statement to at least provide one link to statistics or something that supports the position. It really would be helpful, instead of a dangling statement, which could be very accurate, yet comes off as unsupported, i.e., without data someone can read and digest.</p>

<p>How can there possibly be reliable data on how many women are bruised on a date? I can’t believe anyone thinks it’s anywhere close to a majority, though. That’s just sad.</p>

<p>^^ The statement was made that there is such data. Interesting that you think reliable data does not even exist. That is my point. It would be helpful to the discussion to have something other than a blanket statement to at least respond to. </p>

<p>I tend to think, fortunately as well, that most women are not bruised on dates. But would be nice to be able to point to something. </p>

<p>ww.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlg/vol26/carlson.pdf</p>

<p>Looks like about 30% of young women report dating violence (20% of teens 14-18) . I suspect that a bruise in itself isn’t likely to result in a report of dating violence. That is, I suspect wrestling in the car over taking off the shirt or whatever isn’t considered violent enough, more normal behavior. So I stand by my bet and its guesstimate.</p>

<p>It may not be scientific, but it’s ballpark.</p>

<p>^^ It is important to be fair to the tabulated data. 30% is not a majority, and the rest you conjecture to get the “majority” statement. You can stand by that guesstimate, as you state, but it adds nothing of substance to the discussion.</p>

<p>The only number that can be discussed with any confidence is the 30%. You may be accurate about the majority, but nothing to support it; it could also be very inaccurate as well. </p>

<p>Barrie Levy, whose book “Dating Violence: Young Women in Danger” is the source of the 30% figure, is trying to draw attention to the magnitude of the problem, so it appears unlikely he was low-balling the number. Also, keep in mind this figure is based on data from all social classes, and I suspect that the numbers are much higher for people on the lower end of the socioeconomic scale, given the correlation between violent behavior and being on the lower end, which would mean that the percentage would be significantly lower for those above the median on that scale.</p>

<p>I think the article had the tone of assuming the man was at fault in all cases. There can be situations whereby men are wrongly accused, whether intentionally to harm someone/get them kicked out of school/exact revenge or in a confusion after an incident where one’s memory is not good. It seems like young people are advised to have witnesses all around them at all times to prevent misunderstandings or revenge charges.There is no excuse to rape or sexually harass a woman - of course - but I am concerned by articles that heavily imply wrongdoing by young men and the university! As far as I am concerned, OFF CAMPUS activity is NOT the university’s responsibility or purview! What goes down on campus most certainly is the responsibility of campus police, dorm managers, and the campus community.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I emphatically disagree. If it’s a criminal issue it should go to the police (the real police), not campus police. It would be like if I took it to my landlord instead of the police if I got robbed in my apartment building. </p>

<p>Fortunately, on my campus, campus police IS the police. But I agree with Vladenschlutte, call the police; not your dorm manager. </p>

<p>Another one who agrees, if you are assaulted, call the police. Assault is a crime. Rape is a crime. If I’m assaulted at work, or worse raped at work I’m sure as heck not calling HR…I’m calling the police. As a courtesy I might call company security after I call the police and THEY can call HR… a crime is a crime doesn’t matter where it happens. </p>

<p>I don’t think it needs to be one or the other. I think both should be notified in cases of rape. I think the difficulty lies in that victims may not know what to do or may possibly believe that they’ve covered all bases when they contact their campus police. And, as noted above, at some schools those entities are actually one in the same, at others they are not. Sure, what to do is probably buried somewhere in the handbook or on the school’s website somewhere, but when one is faced with that being in that situation, he/she probably isn’t thinking clearly to read through all of that. But in cases where they truly are separate, each entity does different things and can serve different purposes for the victim. Reporting to the on campus police notifies them (the school) that their honor code or sexual misconduct policy was broken. If there is a finding, this can give the victim some protection such as issuing a no contact directive to the attacker, forcing a dorm change or a switch in classes so the victim would not have to face the attacker on a daily basis. In the most serious cases, the attacker can be suspended or expelled. Reporting to the municipal (or whatever jurisdiction) police notifies authorities that a crime has been committed so they can investigate accordingly, and if applicable, pursue criminal charges. Of course, if found guilty, the attacker can land in jail. But, while I think both SHOULD be called, I do have compassion for the victim and can understand there may be situations where she/he may be reluctant to do so, especially in those cases where it is not so cut and dry. </p>

<p>Back to the OP’s questions… @soonmtnest; Another thing to add to your list of things to talk about with your D is never go off alone into a room with a boy (or boys) you don’t know well at any time of day (drunk or not)! Also, be suspicious of a boy who is coming on strong trying to carve you away from your group of friends if you are at a party. At our house, we actually never waited to have a “big” talk prior to the start of college. We started way before that and had smaller discussions along the way based on “teachable moments” whenever there was something relevant in the news (i.e. say Steubenville). </p>

<p>“I think the cases in which a male physically overpowers a resisting female are very rare on college campuses, and do not constitute the kind of case we are talking about”</p>

<p>I am not sure I understand. What is happening? She is unconscious or incapacitated in most cases? And unable to say no or resist at all?</p>

<p>Is that really the majority of cases?</p>

<p>No, I think the majority of cases are after the fact realization of a miscommunication. “I was drunk and didn’t resist but I said no and he didn’t stop and I let him continue but I meant stop.” And, the guy says, “Huh?” That kind of thing, I believe.</p>

<p>What happens when both the male and female are totally intoxicated to the point of incapacitation and they have sex, but neither of them was sufficiently cognizant to say, “no”? Have they both raped each other?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>That seems to fit the “unclear or misinterpreted consent” scenario, which is probably one of the common college campus rape scenarios. The other probably-common campus rape scenario would be the actual sexual predator scenario (not necessarily violent, but may take advantage of drunk victims or add more drugs to victims’ drinks).</p>

<p>Methods to avoid each scenario are not all the same, although one avoidance method common to both is to avoid getting drunk or drugged enough to lose one’s ability to think clearly enough to refuse, avoid, or resist unwanted sex.</p>