Femme Fatale or Date Rape Victim?

Black Swan

Days ago Nia Sanchez won Miss USA 2014. A 4th degree black belt and taekwondo instructor, she is a strong advocate of women learning self-defense and martial arts to protect themselves, especially women attending college and university campuses in America where date rape is a serious problem.

This launched a controversy with some women's rights activists, where they accused Nia Sanchez of blaming the victim. For example, why should women have to learn self-defense, or martial arts (that would take years to master) when they were not at fault? And if women did not master SD or MA, to what extent were they to blame for allowing themselves to be victimized? Furthermore, was Nia Sanchez misdirecting people away from solving the real problem: eliminating date rape by addressing its primary and contributing factors, rather than an SD or MA band aid approach?

Is date rape a serious problem? The US Centers for Disease control conducted a study of 5,000 college students sampled from 100 colleges. 20% of women answered "yes" to the question "In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?" This study suggested that it was a serious problem, given that one in five college women claimed to have been raped at some point in her lifetime (Douglas, K. A. et al. "Results From the 1995 National College Health Risk Behavior Survey." Journal of American College Health 46, 1997, pp 55-66).

Although date rape is a complex problem, and women learning SD or MA is not the silver bullet that will solve this problem, I do agree with Nia Sanchez that it's part of the solution. If and when I have a daughter someday, she will learn MA, just like being required to attend primary and secondary education. After LC she can decide if she wants to continue MA, but until then, tough love!

Pro and con opinions? Suggestions? Solutions?

The way the internet echo chamber has been going the last few years it couldn't be long before any advice to women about avoiding potential issues would constitute victim blaming.

If I have children of any kind I'll do what I can to teach them how to handle/avoid conflict of any kind.

Recondite49

Black Swan wrote: »

Days ago Nia Sanchez won Miss USA 2014. A 4th degree black belt and taekwondo instructor, she is a strong advocate of women learning self-defense and martial arts to protect themselves, especially women attending college and university campuses in America where date rape is a serious problem.

This launched a controversy with some women's rights activists, where they accused Nia Sanchez of blaming the victim. For example, why should women have to learn self-defense, or martial arts (that would take years to master) when they were not at fault? And if women did not master SD or MA, to what extent were they to blame for allowing themselves to be victimized? Furthermore, was Nia Sanchez misdirecting people away from solving the real problem: eliminating date rape by addressing its primary and contributing factors, rather than an SD or MA band aid approach?

Is date rape a serious problem? The US Centers for Disease control conducted a study of 5,000 college students sampled from 100 colleges. 20% of women answered "yes" to the question "In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?" This study suggested that it was a serious problem, given that one in five college women claimed to have been raped at some point in her lifetime (Douglas, K. A. et al. "Results From the 1995 National College Health Risk Behavior Survey." Journal of American College Health 46, 1997, pp 55-66).

Although date rape is a complex problem, and women learning SD or MA is not the silver bullet that will solve this problem, I do agree with Nia Sanchez that it's part of the solution. If and when I have a daughter someday, she will learn MA, just like being required to attend primary and secondary education. After LC she can decide if she wants to continue MA, but until then, tough love!

Pro and con opinions? Suggestions? Solutions?

It's always amusing to me when Feminists expose their own hypocrisy - criticising a woman for advocating martial arts classes seems to me to be tantamount to saying they'd rather see women raped in order to confirm their status as victims - a rather bizarre point of view!

I used to teach Kenpo a few years ago along with my Sensei and the female students were amongst our best inasmuch as they paid attention closely to what we said and practised Kata in their own time.

Interestingly the subject of rape never came up - the ones I spoke to just thought of it as a good form of exercise - at least that's what they told me!

Part of our sessions though were aimed at diffusing potentially volatile situations and knowing when NOT to act violently - I suppose the hardcore Feminazis would just say this is a reworking of victim blaming as it implies the woman has some level of control over the situation.

My own opinion is that martial arts enable women. I can't see any virtue towards an attitude that seems to say it's better for a woman to be raped than fight off an attacker just so we can feel certain rape is never the woman's fault.

What's puzzling is that no one seems to object to advice never to leave valuables unattended or to use a complex password on their computer even though by the same token there's apparently some kind of moral abrogation in so doing.

challengemaster

Black Swan wrote: »

This launched a controversy with some women's rights activists, where they accused Nia Sanchez of blaming the victim. For example, why should women have to learn self-defense, or martial arts (that would take years to master) when they were not at fault? And if women did not master SD or MA, to what extent were they to blame for allowing themselves to be victimized? Furthermore, was Nia Sanchez misdirecting people away from solving the real problem: eliminating date rape by addressing its primary and contributing factors, rather than an SD or MA band aid approach?

"Blaming the victim" seems to be the buzz word of women's rights activists.

To see it's nonsense, all you need to do is look at any criminal act where you have a victim and perpetrator, and a likelihood of this criminal act occurring. Take breaking & entering / burglary for example. By virtue of living in accommodation, you are at risk. As such, you take measures (door locks, alarms) to reduce the risk of the event occurring in the first place, and in the event it does happen - there are laws put in place that allow you to use appropriate (lethal in the US/Firearms) force to protect yourself, your family and your property.

Surely the option to fit locks and alarms to your home, and these laws are also victim blaming by the same logic? Nobody seems to blame house owners when they get robbed despite taking such precautions, though. There seems to be a thin vague line in the sand that allows people to get away with calling it that. In reality, it's situation awareness and taking appropriate precautions towards a threat.

Yes, in the perfect world it would not be necessary - and eliminating burglary by tacking it's causes would be an ideal solution. The reality of actually accomplishing this feat is colossal. This is the same with date rape, or in fact most crime. Like you said, it is a complex problem. By the time a fool-proof solution to the root cause is determined and eventually rolled out - how many more victims have fallen foul to it? You don't start tackling burglary by leaving your doors and windows open, so why would you take a similar approach with something like date rape?

In this case, Nia Sanchez is doing nothing more than promoting MA as what she feels is an appropriate and worthwhile precaution for criminal acts pertaining to a person as the direct victim. There's nothing victim blaming about it, she (and others, study below) have obviously realized there is a real threat that is unlikely to be eradicated within our lifetime. Why would you not take every precaution to protect yourself from it?

Is date rape a serious problem? The US Centers for Disease control conducted a study of 5,000 college students sampled from 100 colleges. 20% of women answered "yes" to the question "In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?" This study suggested that it was a serious problem, given that one in five college women claimed to have been raped at some point in her lifetime (Douglas, K. A. et al. "Results From the 1995 National College Health Risk Behavior Survey." Journal of American College Health 46, 1997, pp 55-66).

It also seems 4% of men answered "yes" to the same question, bearing in mind it was done in 1995. It would certainly be interesting to see have those percentages changed in a follow up / repeat study, almost 20 years later.

Although date rape is a complex problem, and women learning SD or MA is not the silver bullet that will solve this problem, I do agree with Nia Sanchez that it's part of the solution. If and when I have a daughter someday, she will learn MA, just like being required to attend primary and secondary education. After LC she can decide if she wants to continue MA, but until then, tough love!

Pro and con opinions? Suggestions? Solutions?

I'd be cautious about calling it part of the solution, I'm not sure if you could call it that. No more than any other precaution or preventative measure, you aren't tacking the cause of the problem, merely making it less likely to happen (to you). But, until there is any real solution to the problem, then it is a sensible precaution to have in the arsenal.

Pat Mustard

Black Swan wrote: »

Pro and con opinions? Suggestions? Solutions?

First, she is being accused of blaming the victim. On the basis of the article and the video clip, I didn't see her blame anybody for anything. I don't know why the talk-show host even read out those seemingly baseless comments from dissatisfied viewers. It seemed like sensationalist attention-grabbing more than anything else.

Secondly, she is a Taekwondo instructor. Over on the martial arts forum, it is sometimes said that a martial art's effectiveness is based on the way upon which it is trained/instructed and on the way in which competition takes place. A lot of people talk about the benefits of Muay Thai, boxing, MMA (Mixed Martial Arts), Judo, and BJJ (Brazilian Jiu Jitsu). Boxing only involves punches, without any other means of attack, but it is still an extremely effective martial art, because of the way in which it is trained and the way in which boxers compete. Even a mediocre boxer can be a serious combatant. On the other hand, many of the 'pyjama' styles of Traditional Martial Arts are spoken about as maybe lacking a certain effectiveness. That's all I'll say on that for the moment, because people disagree to a certain extent on the issue.

Thirdly, while self defence may be important, confidence, assertiveness and common sense are also important. Somebody can improve confidence and assertiveness from many sports. My opinion is that it would be more beneficial for a person to compete at a decent level in relation to a sport that they enjoy, rather than being forced to pursue some activity that they don't enjoy.

Rips

I agree wholeheartedly with Challengemaster bar

its a sensible precaution to have in the arsenal

Why is it considered a sensible precaution though for this particular crime? Why martial arts in specific relation to rape. Its rather simplifying the issue I feel.

It would require a substantial amount of time and dedication to safeguard against one possible type of incident, where other simpler precautions may be just as effective.

The obvious drawback would be that it might give the individual a false sense of security, where inevitably, even a blackbelt may not be able to prevent a planned or opportunist attack.

Given the statistics based on students who were raped and knew their attacker, it does not seem to me that physicality or skill in defence arts is a predominant factor in prevention.

I still wouldn't be opposed to Nia Sanchez's suggestion, as a suggestion only. I think the feminists stance is a sensationalist view and they risk drawing more attention to one particular personal choice and clouding the real issues.

Black Swan wrote: »

If and when I have a daughter someday, she will learn MA, just like being required to attend primary and secondary education.

This, for instance I really don't understand. Would you explain your reasoning behind this to your daughter, or at what point?
It seems excessive, you could encourage an interest at the right age, perhaps when she is old enough for the 'stranger danger' lesson, but to insist upon it as part of her vital education? Is it that important? It would seem a shame, to dedicate so much energy (considering the level of skill that would need to be attained to be of use) to this one aspect of prevention, particularly if the child became disinterested.

And this is coming from the perspective of someone who has just discovered that I have unknowingly been in contact with a convicted rapist every day for the last 6 months.

For the sake of discussion, it might be worth mentioning, he was convicted or rape and false imprisonment, because he tied up the girl's boyfriend to carry out the attack.

Some help martial arts would have been to me, alone, and no-one to know where I was or to expect me home. I am a physically weak, twenty-something year old and I was armoured in nothing except common sense, which made me keep my distance from this 'slightly odd' individual. At no point did I ever consider that he was a convicted rapist though. It never crossed my mind.

I'm not suggesting good judgement is enough either, merely that it is impossible to predict what situation you would need to protect yourself against. Nia Sanchez was forced to clarify that that is her personal choice when it comes down to the issue.

I feel it would be much more prudent to discuss all the risks with this hypothetical daughter, rather then forcing her to learn martial arts and placing too much emphasis on one safeguard.

The Corinthian

To a great extent suggesting that by learning MA one is taking responsibility to avoid scenarios such as rape is a bit like suggesting that American schools would safer if every student had a gun.

Thing is, when I'm walking down a street at night, I shouldn't need to know MA so that I can protect myself from some drunken skanger who's looking for a fight.

Given this, if I walk down a dark alleyway in a dangerous part of the city, then I am asking for it, just as if I put my hand in a crocodile's mouth I should not be surprised I won't get it back.

So the problem with this debate is really down to what is reasonable precaution or not. Unfortunately it's been politicized to such an extent by some feminist groups where any precaution is deemed to be 'victim blaming', no matter how reasonable, or bloody obvious, it may be.

It seems to be an overall trend, not only with this issue but in general, whereby people are seeking rights while divesting themselves of personal responsibility.

sbsquarepants

It's nonsense of the highest order - there is very little to be said for any advice that starts with "You should be able to....." You have to take the world as it is, not as it should be. You should be able to leave your doors open and not have your stuff robbed - you should be, but you aren't. That's reality. Advising people to lock their doors is not victim blaming, it's practical advice.
I have an 18 year old daughter, she should be able to wear revealing clothes and walk down dark alleyways without fear of some dirtbird grabbing hold of her, but that doesn't mean me telling her she can't is the same thing as me blaming her if something did happen. You have to protect yourself, that is reality. There are bad people who do bad things, even though they shouldn't, that is reality.
Any life advice that ignores reality is just really shítty advice and best ignored.

Black Swan

challengemaster wrote: »

In this case, Nia Sanchez is doing nothing more than promoting MA as what she feels is an appropriate and worthwhile precaution for criminal acts pertaining to a person as the direct victim... she (and others, study below) have obviously realized there is a real threat that is unlikely to be eradicated within our lifetime. Why would you not take every precaution to protect yourself from it?

The Mustard wrote: »

My opinion is that it would be more beneficial for a person to compete at a decent level in relation to a sport that they enjoy, rather than being forced to pursue some activity that they don't enjoy.

Rips wrote: »

Given the statistics based on students who were raped and knew their attacker, it does not seem to me that physicality or skill in defence arts is a predominant factor in prevention.

The Corinthian wrote: »

So the problem with this debate is really down to what is reasonable precaution or not.

Leanne R. Brecklin, LR and Ullman, SE (2005), "Self-Defense or Assertiveness Training and Women’s Responses to Sexual Attacks," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol 20, No 6, pp 738-762, conducted a study of 1,623 women, concluding:

"Self-defense classes aim to prevent violence against women by strengthening women’s capacity to defend themselves... Multivariate analyses showed that victims with preassault training were more likely to say that their resistance stopped the offender or made him less aggressive than victims without training. Women with training before their assaults were angrier and less scared during the incident than women without training, consistent with the teachings of self-defense training."

Pat Mustard

http://www.sagepub.com/lippmanccl2e/study/articles/Brecklin.pdf

The Corinthian

Black Swan wrote: »

Leanne R. Brecklin, LR and Ullman, SE (2005), "Self-Defense or Assertiveness Training and Women’s Responses to Sexual Attacks," Journal of Interpersonal Violence, Vol 20, No 6, pp 738-762, conducted a study of 1,623 women, concluding:

"Self-defense classes aim to prevent violence against women by strengthening women’s capacity to defend themselves... Multivariate analyses showed that victims with preassault training were more likely to say that their resistance stopped the offender or made him less aggressive than victims without training. Women with training before their assaults were angrier and less scared during the incident than women without training, consistent with the teachings of self-defense training."

Bit of a non-sequitor to my point TBH.

diveout

Black Swan wrote: »

Days ago Nia Sanchez won Miss USA 2014. A 4th degree black belt and taekwondo instructor, she is a strong advocate of women learning self-defense and martial arts to protect themselves, especially women attending college and university campuses in America where date rape is a serious problem.

This launched a controversy with some women's rights activists, where they accused Nia Sanchez of blaming the victim. For example, why should women have to learn self-defense, or martial arts (that would take years to master) when they were not at fault? And if women did not master SD or MA, to what extent were they to blame for allowing themselves to be victimized? Furthermore, was Nia Sanchez misdirecting people away from solving the real problem: eliminating date rape by addressing its primary and contributing factors, rather than an SD or MA band aid approach?

Is date rape a serious problem? The US Centers for Disease control conducted a study of 5,000 college students sampled from 100 colleges. 20% of women answered "yes" to the question "In your lifetime have you been forced to submit to sexual intercourse against your will?" This study suggested that it was a serious problem, given that one in five college women claimed to have been raped at some point in her lifetime (Douglas, K. A. et al. "Results From the 1995 National College Health Risk Behavior Survey." Journal of American College Health 46, 1997, pp 55-66).

Although date rape is a complex problem, and women learning SD or MA is not the silver bullet that will solve this problem, I do agree with Nia Sanchez that it's part of the solution. If and when I have a daughter someday, she will learn MA, just like being required to attend primary and secondary education. After LC she can decide if she wants to continue MA, but until then, tough love!

Pro and con opinions? Suggestions? Solutions?

I really have to ask, if date rape is such a serious problem on college campuses why does anyone send their daughters to college?

dharma200

Why does everyone send their daughters to college... It's not the 1950s, nor is it Afghanistan.
Perhaps if you really have to ask college might be a solution for you.

diveout

dharma200 wrote: »

Why does everyone send their daughters to college... It's not the 1950s, nor is it Afghanistan.
Perhaps if you really have to ask college might be a solution for you.

I'm querying the reality of this date rape is such a big problem on campuses.

Seriously, if we can blame parents for sending kids to boarding schools where they knew they were getting beaten, then why can't you query sending your kids to college if rape is such an epidemic?

And it kind of is like the 1950s- this obsession with date rape is neo puritan and we may as well bring out the 1950s dating manuals.

dharma200

I think you will find most colleges students are over 18

diveout

dharma200 wrote: »

I think you will find most colleges students are over 18

Your point?

I think you will find most of their parents are paying for it.

Potatoeman

The Mustard wrote: »

First, she is being accused of blaming the victim. On the basis of the article and the video clip, I didn't see her blame anybody for anything. I don't know why the talk-show host even read out those seemingly baseless comments from dissatisfied viewers. It seemed like sensationalist attention-grabbing more than anything else.

Secondly, she is a Taekwondo instructor. Over on the martial arts forum, it is sometimes said that a martial art's effectiveness is based on the way upon which it is trained/instructed and on the way in which competition takes place. A lot of people talk about the benefits of Muay Thai, boxing, MMA (Mixed Martial Arts), Judo, and BJJ (Brazilian Jiu Jitsu). Boxing only involves punches, without any other means of attack, but it is still an extremely effective martial art, because of the way in which it is trained and the way in which boxers compete. Even a mediocre boxer can be a serious combatant. On the other hand, many of the 'pyjama' styles of Traditional Martial Arts are spoken about as maybe lacking a certain effectiveness. That's all I'll say on that for the moment, because people disagree to a certain extent on the issue.

Thirdly, while self defence may be important, confidence, assertiveness and common sense are also important. Somebody can improve confidence and assertiveness from many sports. My opinion is that it would be more beneficial for a person to compete at a decent level in relation to a sport that they enjoy, rather than being forced to pursue some activity that they don't enjoy.

Some are martial arts others are sports. Judo is the sport version of jiu-jitsu. Judo was designed for school students and removed some of the more dangerous moves.
Boxing is a sport and though a good boxer can land punches quickly most fights end on the ground pretty fast.

The advantage of a MA is that you are prepared. One important thing is
sparring and not being afraid to be hit, another is muscle memory where you just react when someone attacks you.

I would encourage anyone to get their kids into it at an early age. With a good instructor. Everyone should know how to defend themselves.

Recondite49

Potatoeman wrote: »

Some are martial arts others are sports. Judo is the sport version of jiu-jitsu. Judo was designed for school students and removed some of the more dangerous moves.
Boxing is a sport and though a good boxer can land punches quickly most fights end on the ground pretty fast.

The advantage of a MA is that you are prepared. One important thing is
sparring and not being afraid to be hit, another is muscle memory where you just react when someone attacks you.

I would encourage anyone to get their kids into it at an early age. With a good instructor. Everyone should know how to defend themselves.

When I did Kenpo Karate the first hour was just spent doing CV exercises. I did the girly pushups and was chastised accordingly. :-D So, from a fitness perspective it's a good idea anyway.

Of course practising in a dojo can't recreate the fear of an actual confrontation and at least between men fighting is usually both ugly and pathetic.

Having said this, if a woman learns a martial art, at the very least she can make a choice about whether to try to defend herself if attacked. It's of course very unlikely to happen but then that's not much comfort when it happens to you.

Pat Mustard

Potatoeman wrote: »

Some are martial arts others are sports. Judo is the sport version of jiu-jitsu. Judo was designed for school students and removed some of the more dangerous moves.
Boxing is a sport and though a good boxer can land punches quickly most fights end on the ground pretty fast.

The advantage of a MA is that you are prepared. One important thing is
sparring and not being afraid to be hit, another is muscle memory where you just react when someone attacks you.

I would encourage anyone to get their kids into it at an early age. With a good instructor. Everyone should know how to defend themselves.

Boxing and Judo are both sports and martial arts at the same time.

The perceived advantage of some non-competitive martial arts is that they retain dangerous and/or lethal moves. However, by their nature, these moves can't be trained and drilled effectively, or against full resistance. For this reason, Jigoro Kano (founder of Judo) removed such moves from Judo. He did not do so because such moves have no place in a sport. He removed them because he deemed that they were impractical and therefore less effective. He attempted to distil the best moves into an effective martial art, believing that effective training and drilling of more effective sweeps, throws, chokes, etc., would lead to a more effective fighting art.

Many traditional martial arts are practised with choreographed moves, telegraphed towards an opponent who is responding at half contact.

By contrast, Judo and boxing are trained and drilled for fighting against fully resisting opponents. All things being equal, a fighter who trains for competition should be better able to fight than one who practises choreographed moves only.

It is true that many fights end up on the ground, and for this reason, it is important to have ground fighting skills. These are not taught in boxing, but boxing is still a highly effective fighting art, mainly because of the way in which it is trained. A good boxer can end a standing fight blindingly fast.

It is my opinion that it is better to be effective at fighting with a more limited range of tools than to have wide range of less effective or even ineffective tools.

However, if there is a solution to the issue of covering all your bases, it could be Mixed Martial Arts (MMA).

eviltwin

diveout wrote: »

Your point?

I think you will find most of their parents are paying for it.

Its a massive over reaction to deny a woman an education on the off chance she might get raped. But I guess there are some people out there who would see that as a good thing.

Pat Mustard

Diveout was making a rhetorical statement, disputing that date rape has a large incidence.

diveout

eviltwin wrote: »

Its a massive over reaction to deny a woman an education on the off chance she might get raped. But I guess there are some people out there who would see that as a good thing.

Exactly. It is an off chance I suspect.

My point was how big a problem is this in reality? Or is it just stirred up feminist hysteria to villify male sexuality?

Pat Mustard

diveout wrote: »

My point was how big a problem is this in reality? Or is it just stirred up feminist hysteria to villify male sexuality?

Whoah. That's a bit severe. Just because it's uncommon doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I read about reports of it when I was in college.

diveout

The Mustard wrote: »

Whoah. That's a bit severe. Just because it's uncommon doesn't mean it doesn't happen. I read about reports of it when I was in college.

I am sure it does happen but campus politics have gone way OTT. If it were as much as a problem as is made out by feminists, then surely people would not send their daughters there. The fact that they do send their daughters there, suggests to me anyway, the risk is not that high.

CIARAN_BOYLE

Daterape is a broad term these days that covers a lot of things from a drunk woman consenting to sex that she would not have when sober to drugging with something like rohypnol.

Neither of those situations will be prevented by martial arts.

That said martial arts or self defence is in my opinion valuable for everyone to know.

Black Swan

challengemaster wrote: »

It would certainly be interesting to see have those percentages changed in a follow up / repeat study, almost 20 years later.

diveout wrote: »

I'm querying the reality of this date rape is such a big problem on campuses.

The US National Institute of Justice reports (26 October 2010): "The most recent and methodologically rigorous studies show that sexual assault still occurs at rates that approximate those first identified more than 20 years ago when Koss, Gidycz, and Wisiewski found that approximately 27.5% of college women reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape."

diveout

Black Swan wrote: »

The US National Institute of Justice reports (26 October 2010): "The most recent and methodologically rigorous studies show that sexual assault still occurs at rates that approximate those first identified more than 20 years ago when Koss, Gidycz, and Wisiewski found that approximately 27.5% of college women reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape."

Well 20 years ago was the 1990s when all this started. And campuses have their own kangaroo courts now with rules that also consider "verbal co-ercion" as part of their parameters.

If you look at what that link considers sexual assault, a cat call or a whistle or a "hey sexy" would count as sexual violence.

So if you count all those things, like hi want to get some coffee? as sexual violence, sure thing.

Standman

These sorts of women's rights activists seem more preoccupied with admonishing people for things rather than doing something productive.

Regarding the importance self defence training, I think taking a martial arts class is of negligible advantage if you don't do some sort of proper sparring. You might feel more confident in your abilities if you are blue belt in Karate, but if all you have done is learned and practiced moves without any real force behind them or without being out of your comfort zone, then you will be in for a nasty surprise if you get into an altercation.

In fairness though with the gaining popularity of MMA, people seem to be becoming more and more aware of this.

Black Swan

diveout wrote: »

Well 20 years ago was the 1990s when all this started. And campuses have their own kangaroo courts now with rules that also consider "verbal co-ercion" as part of their parameters.

If you look at what that link considers sexual assault, a cat call or a whistle or a "hey sexy" would count as sexual violence.

So if you count all those things, like hi want to get some coffee? as sexual violence, sure thing.

When the US National Institute of Justice report concluded "The most recent and methodologically rigorous studies show that sexual assault still occurs at rates that approximate those first identified more than 20 years ago when Koss, Gidycz, and Wisiewski found that approximately 27.5% of college women reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape," it had been discussed under the section on Rape, not Sexual Harassment or Sexual Assault.

The "legal criteria for rape" was not "a cat call" or a whistle or a "hey sexy," as defined by the National Institute of Justice.

If self-defense training (or better yet years of martial arts training with sparring) as advocated by Nia Sanchez can eliminate one daughter (yes, just one) from suffering "rape as nonconsensual oral, anal, or vaginal penetration of the victim by body parts or objects using force" on a college campus today, then it should be considered as one of several preventative measures that may be taken.

diveout

Black Swan wrote: »

When the US National Institute of Justice report concluded "The most recent and methodologically rigorous studies show that sexual assault still occurs at rates that approximate those first identified more than 20 years ago when Koss, Gidycz, and Wisiewski found that approximately 27.5% of college women reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape," it had been discussed under the section on Rape, not Sexual Harassment or Sexual Assault.

The "legal criteria for rape" was not "a cat call" or a whistle or a "hey sexy," as defined by the National Institute of Justice.

If self-defense training (or better yet years of martial arts training with sparring) as advocated by Nia Sanchez can eliminate one daughter (yes, just one) from suffering "rape as nonconsensual oral, anal, or vaginal penetration of the victim by body parts or objects using force" on a college campus today, then it should be considered as one of several preventative measures that may be taken.

"Most statutes currently define rape as nonconsensual oral, anal, or vaginal penetration of the victim by body parts or objects using force, threats of bodily harm, or by taking advantage of a victim who is incapacitated or otherwise incapable of giving consent. Incapacitation may include mental or cognitive disability, self-induced or forced intoxication, status as minor, or any other condition defined by law that voids an individual's ability to give consent."

I would be very interested to see by the way any studies done on the effects of martial arts on the fight, flight or freeze response.

So if the rapes are that high at 27%, why are women going to co-ed colleges?

FBI have very different statistics:
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime/rapemain

http://campusclarity.blogspot.ie/2013/10/how-do-we-know-1-in-4-women-will-be.html

If I were actually to believe that statistic I'd b sending my daughter to Smith or Bryn Mawr.

Potatoeman

CIARAN_BOYLE wrote: »

Daterape is a broad term these days that covers a lot of things from a drunk woman consenting to sex that she would not have when sober to drugging with something like rohypnol.

Neither of those situations will be prevented by martial arts.

That said martial arts or self defence is in my opinion valuable for everyone to know.

That can be pretty broad though. You might sleep with someone when you are both drunk, that you would not normally sleep with. Arent both responsible in that case?

CIARAN_BOYLE

Potatoeman wrote: »

That can be pretty broad though. You might sleep with someone when you are both drunk, that you would not normally sleep with. Arent both responsible in that case?

Women often claim date rape in that case, under the basis that 'men can't be raped'.

Not trying to trivilise rape here just don't like the term daterape or its use.

Recondite49

Potatoeman wrote: »

That can be pretty broad though. You might sleep with someone when you are both drunk, that you would not normally sleep with. Arent both responsible in that case?

I think from a moral perspective you're spot on Potatoeman but from a legal point of view your reputation could still be ruined if a woman who regrets sleeping with you tries to claim it was rape.

The government in the UK backed down over anonymity for men accused of rape, on the basis that it might encourage other women to come forward and claim they'd been raped by him too.

As such I've always recommended to my male friends that it's best not to be alone with women you don't know well. Some of them have reacted angrily as they believe this to be a masculine form of "victim blaming" - the moral onus is on the woman not to lie, not for them to avoid being accused, but it doesn't change the reality of the situation.

Black Swan

diveout wrote: »

So if the rapes are that high at 27%, why are women going to co-ed colleges?

If you don't want to accept the conclusions by the US National Institute of Justice and other studies cited, discussing percentages becomes problematic; e.g., it can become 2-sides of a fruitless Darrell Huff argument.

Putting percentages aside, do you believe that forced rape occurs on college campuses in America, Ireland, and other countries? Yes or no?

If yes, how many real (indisputable in your mind) forced rapes on college and university campuses per nation have to occur per year before you think women should seriously take precautions? One forced rape? Two? Ten? Hundreds? Thousands? How many before it becomes of concern to you? Please give us a number.

biko

Black Swan wrote: »

This launched a controversy with some women's rights activists, where they accused Nia Sanchez of blaming the victim. For example, why should women have to learn self-defense, or martial arts (that would take years to master) when they were not at fault? And if women did not master SD or MA, to what extent were they to blame for allowing themselves to be victimized?

This to me is a logical fallacy. Not knowing how to defend yourself is not equal to "allowing yourself to become a victim" in the same way as bringing a knife to a gunfight is not "allowing oneself to become a victim".

Pat Mustard

diveout wrote: »

I would be very interested to see by the way any studies done on the effects of martial arts on the fight, flight or freeze response.

The OODA loop is something which has been written about by military strategist, John Boyd. The idea is that the decision making process can be described as a recurring cycle or set of interacting cycles, whereby people Observe, Orient, Decide and Act.

This concept can be used to attempt to understand why people freeze during an assault.

Rory Miller, a jail guard and martial artist (with a degree in psychology), writes that he has been in hundreds of real life physical altercations in his book; "Meditations on Violence: A Comparison of Martial Arts Training & Real World Violence." He also writes about the OODA loop and people freezing during assaults.

He writes that time is typically lost during the two middle steps (Orient, Decide). He also writes that decision making can get caught in a repeating cycle in the OODA loop, as people observe that blows are raining in, and orient that they are being attacked (for instance) and before any action is taken, further blows are observed and oriented to in a similar manner, resulting in no action being taken during an assault. The person freezes.

At p.36 he writes that:

Operant conditioning (see Section 5.4) is critical in self-defense because it is possible, in certain situations, including surprise attacks, to cut out the middle two steps and develop an automatic, reflex-level response.

Not knowing much about psychology myself, I just take the man's word for it.

What he is essentially saying is that you can train for an automatic response to these situations.

Miller also writes about the effect of the adrenaline dump on the body in a stressful situation, how fine motor skills become compromised, but gross motor skills remain largely intact. This can improve the effectiveness of an attack by an unskilled fighter. However, a trained fighter will find that his attacks become less effective than they would be without the effects of the adrenal dump. He loses more because he has more to lose. Miller talks about exposure to violence reducing the effect of the chemical cocktail on the body, and also writes about various tactics/strategies for dealing with and training for such situations.

I also thought that this excerpt was interesting, in relation to the effect of the adrenal dump on an aggressor or potential threat (pp. 63-64):

Some people get big, red and loud. Their face flushes; they swell up and try to intimidate with size and voice. They are trying to intimidate, pure and simple. They have more in common with the Monkey Dance than predatory violence. They are usually not a problem.

Small, white, and pale indicates a threat in a pretty advanced stage of adrenalization. His blood has pooled to his center and he is on the edge of panic. If something sets him off, he will go frantically insane. He will hurt you, much like a cornered animal.

Some go “flat” when the adrenaline hits. They seem emotionless, alert. Eyes widen into a thousand-yard stare. In general, they are experienced with the adrenaline state and can and will hurt you. They will retain a large percentage of skill. They make ugly opponents. On the good side, of the three types, these are the ones that can still communicate. You can talk to them.

He also discusses a number of other issues such as where, when and why violence occurs. There is a chapter on predators. It's an interesting book from a man with with decades of experience of violence.

P.s. I see that the entire book can be viewed for free on scribd.com if you google it. I didn't post a link to it, because there is also mention of a torrent there.

Black Swan

diveout wrote: »

I would be very interested to see by the way any studies done on the effects of martial arts on the fight, flight or freeze response.

The Mustard wrote: »

At p.36 he writes that:

Operant conditioning (see Section 5.4) is critical in self-defense because it is possible, in certain situations, including surprise attacks, to cut out the middle two steps and develop an automatic, reflex-level response.

Not knowing much about psychology myself, I just take the man's word for it.

What he is essentially saying is that you can train for an automatic response to these situations.

Cognitive psychologist RE Clark at University of Southern California has researched, published, and taught this type of human behaviour for decades. Behaviour that is learned through thousands of repetitions is called procedural knowledge, and the response that occurs as the result of such knowledge exhibits automaticity; it occurs automatically without thought.

Picture someone first learning to drive. They are very self-conscious of all the things they must do, and make mistakes driving. If you disrupt their concentration during this time, they tend to make even more mistakes. Yet after years of practice (thousands of repetitions) they can drive without thought (action has been proceduralised). They can now simultaneously drive, chat with a friend in companion seat, adjust the radio/CD, look for an address, check out the cute lad or lass in another car, drink coffee, and if someone unexpectedly hits the breaks immediately in front of them, they can hit their breaks and stop without thinking.

This is one reason why there are thousands of repetitions in MA. Through repetitions over time the actions (e.g., quickly step back while blocking and immediately striking offensively in combinations) becomes proceduralised, and when a triggering action occurs (e.g., attacked; or car in front unexpectedly breaks), and the counter occurs immediately without thought exhibiting automaticity.

In addition to the automaticity that results from proceduralisation, MA (that is taught well) includes extensive simulation learning over time; i.e., simulated combat that occurs while sparring in both dojang/dojo/studio and in tournament fighting (especially in tourneys with advanced level/full contact). The Social Learning Theory of cognitive-behavioural psychologist Albert Bandura of Stanford University demonstrated that learning was enhanced through observation, imitation, and modeling. When social learning is combined with procedural knowledge/automaticity over years of MA training and sparring experiences, the chance of freezing when attacked is greatly reduced.

As for the "flight" response, it may be the most appropriate thing to do in a potential conflict situation, if feasible. Risk avoidance, especially if you are smaller, lighter, and not as strong as your larger opponent may be the best response. Even if you temporarily discourage or otherwise knock down your attacker, the next best move may be to walk or run away.

After having said this, the "flight" response has been a matter of psychological and physiological debate for decades. For those interested, there has been extensive debate and disagreement over this issue. See the opposing James-Lange theory and Cannon-Bard theory. The bear in the woods metaphor by James-Lange was both instructive and amusing.

Wibbs

Black Swan wrote: »

The US National Institute of Justice reports (26 October 2010): "The most recent and methodologically rigorous studies show that sexual assault still occurs at rates that approximate those first identified more than 20 years ago when Koss, Gidycz, and Wisiewski found that approximately 27.5% of college women reported experiences that met the legal criteria for rape."

The Koss study(and I use the term broadly) was the one that kicked this "one in four" stuff off and the methodology was so full of holes it would pass fair muster as a colander. It has since been repeated so often it has become a "fact", even a meme. Indeed some go further and now reference "one in three".

US gov led studies(PDF) into the reported incidence of sexual violence* in the wider US shows at worst 5 in a 1000 women in 1995(the rates of what they term "completed rape" actually dropped from nearly 4 to under 2 per 1000 women from 1995-2010). These are averages taken over two year periods. So how do we get that figure up to one of 250 per 1000 women? Unless we want to believe that US colleges are rape centers of a level that would suggest you sending in the national guard to control it. Interestingly, the colleges themselves by law have to compile and provide reported crime stats on campus - Example 1/Example 2 - and their stats reflect the wider national stats the government study found, not within an asses roar of "one in four".

Let's take another government study(PDF) that seems to back the high figure up. As an exercise take out all other criteria of sexual victimisation and just look at the stats for completed rapes. This comes to just under 2% of those surveyed. 2% is still far too many BTW.

However even looking at that 2% of would be defined in the common mind as "obvious rape" the report states;

"In each incident report, respondents were asked, “Do you consider this incident to be a rape?”. For the 86 incidents categorized as a completed rape, 46.5 percent (n = 40) of the women answered “yes,” 48.8 percent (n = 42) answered “no,” and 4.7 percent (n = 4) answered “don’t know.”".

So of the women in the study whose experience was considered to be clear cut, no question rape, nearly half of them didn't consider it to be. Now of course sexual assault is a minefield of horrible emotional upset and people can easily blot out an incident or pass it off at the time, but when half of a survey of people who apparently fit the bill of full on rape state that they don't consider it such other questions have to be asked. In the original "1 in 4" Koss study this figure was even higher. 73% of those women didn't consider it rape(and 40 odd per cent of them continued sleeping with the same guy).

Black Swan wrote: »

If you don't want to accept the conclusions by the US National Institute of Justice and other studies cited, discussing percentages becomes problematic; e.g., it can become 2-sides of a fruitless Darrell Huff argument.

Not really, or at least that's an easy cop out. You may as well throw out all stats, both in support of the 1 in 4 argument, or against it, or just pull figures out of the air for fun.

Putting percentages aside, do you believe that forced rape occurs on college campuses in America, Ireland, and other countries? Yes or no?

Of course. Empty question really. Rape occurs full stop. The question is does it occur at a significantly higher rate on college campuses? If one is to believe some stats, rather the loose interpretation of same, then it's occurring at a rate that wouldn't look out of place in a full on warzone. It might even be safer in some warzones.

If yes, how many real (indisputable in your mind) forced rapes on college and university campuses per nation have to occur per year before you think women should seriously take precautions? One forced rape? Two? Ten? Hundreds? Thousands? How many before it becomes of concern to you? Please give us a number.

Specious argument TBH. With a side order of the emotive. While one rape is too many, like any risk of harm in any crime it does depend on the actual real world level of said risk. To take your example, there is a huge risk difference between one and thousands in a given population. Shootings occur regularly enough in Ireland, particularly in Dublin with its high population. Am I at risk of being shot? Yes, but the risk is incredibly low all things being equal.

Of course the risk of sexual assualt and rape is higher than the risk of being shot, and such crimes do go on all too regularly, but fudging figures to heighten that risk and shouting "rape culture" helps no one.





*This runs the gamut from rape through unwanted fondling to verbal threats of a sexual nature.

Henry9

http://www.soci270.carvajal.ca/documents/KossTheScopeofRape.pdf

Koss study