Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful.
-
I'm not coming to argue "not all men", but from reading the tooth one walks away with the idea that 95% of men force women to have sex, and that is not what the article says at all. What it claims is that of a population that admits to intentionally sexually aggressed woman, 95% report to use strategies to get a woman to have sex when she hasn't consented.
I mean, clearly the paper itself claims "not all men".
@gabriel And you are definitely coming here to argue ‘not all men’.
-
@gabriel That is a misreading, IMO. The criteria for participation was "Men were eligible if they self-identified as men, were in the age range 18 to 34 years, and reported having had a sexual encounter with a woman in the past 2 years."
Also, if it were only for those who admittedly coerced, etc., then the percentage would have been 100, not 95.1.
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
One interesting thing they don't correct for is men who didn't have sex during the two-year period prior to the study.
Also, I worry this will be used to conclude, a la Dworkin/McKinnon that men are just naturally this way, rather than that we are socialized to behave this way pretty much from birth, and have to learn our way out of it, hopefully before we do something awful. The most commonly reported coercive technique is "tells her what she wants to hear..."
-
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
One interesting thing they don't correct for is men who didn't have sex during the two-year period prior to the study.
Also, I worry this will be used to conclude, a la Dworkin/McKinnon that men are just naturally this way, rather than that we are socialized to behave this way pretty much from birth, and have to learn our way out of it, hopefully before we do something awful. The most commonly reported coercive technique is "tells her what she wants to hear..."
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
I mention this because it's been very clear to me for a long time that boys and young men need clear and explicit education on how to behave towards members of the desired sex (as do girls and young women).
And that ain't happening.
And bashing won't help.
-
R relay@relay.an.exchange shared this topic
-
@gabriel And you are definitely coming here to argue ‘not all men’.
As I say, not me, is what the paper says. You can read it yourself and make up your mind.
I think we need to understand the literature to be able to have strategies to curve this situation. It would be very different if we are talking of 95% of the population or if it the number is different.
Therefore it is important to clarify, in my mind, what the study actually claims.
-
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
I mention this because it's been very clear to me for a long time that boys and young men need clear and explicit education on how to behave towards members of the desired sex (as do girls and young women).
And that ain't happening.
And bashing won't help.
I also concluded the same, that this could be used to argue that "men are this way". And while sexual aggression is a serious problem that is under-reported, a 95% is just too high. That's why I think it is important to clarify the number, and the context.
-
Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630
@amydiehl Looking at the survey questions, it strikes me that Pharrell Williams and Robin Thicke's song "Blurred Lines" advocates for a fair number of the strategies here.
This is absurdly awful.
-
I also concluded the same, that this could be used to argue that "men are this way". And while sexual aggression is a serious problem that is under-reported, a 95% is just too high. That's why I think it is important to clarify the number, and the context.
Unfortunately if this goes viral that won't be effective, because the first message is what people generally remember.
I grew up during the Dworkin/McKinnon period, and bear the scars—that's why I remember their names.
The problem with their work is that they just figured out who to blame, not what to do to fix the situation, and those of us who took them seriously wound up hating ourselves for the misdeeds of others instead of doing anything about it.
-
R relay@relay.publicsquare.global shared this topic
-
@amydiehl OK, but the paper was focused on that demographic:
"This research was designed to focus on men who admit having intentionally and knowingly sexually aggressed against a woman who they knew did not want sex nor consented to it, including strategies to overcome her reluctance, circumstances, motivations, and positive and negative outcomes."
You don't actually know, based on this study, what percentage of all males are in this self-identified category of sexually aggressive men. So maybe not all men, maybe 30% or 70% or 99%. What number is "not all men" enough for you? 1000 men responded to a similar study solicitation in 48 hours on reddit, according to this study.
You really did post simply to say "Not all men." Do you also post "Not all white people" too?
-
You don't actually know, based on this study, what percentage of all males are in this self-identified category of sexually aggressive men. So maybe not all men, maybe 30% or 70% or 99%. What number is "not all men" enough for you? 1000 men responded to a similar study solicitation in 48 hours on reddit, according to this study.
You really did post simply to say "Not all men." Do you also post "Not all white people" too?
I was shocked by the 95% figure, so I downloaded the paper. In it, I found out that the universe of the study is not "all men" but "men who identify themselves as aggressors". Now, when I claim "not-all-men" here, is not a way to deviate the conversation. Is to focus on what the intent of the paper is, and which conclusions can be taken from it. One of them, we need to know what the actual % is. Or focus on what aggressive men do, goal of this particular paper.
-
@amydiehl OK, but the paper was focused on that demographic:
"This research was designed to focus on men who admit having intentionally and knowingly sexually aggressed against a woman who they knew did not want sex nor consented to it, including strategies to overcome her reluctance, circumstances, motivations, and positive and negative outcomes."
-
Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630
@amydiehl of heterosexual men, right?
-
@gabriel That is a misreading, IMO. The criteria for participation was "Men were eligible if they self-identified as men, were in the age range 18 to 34 years, and reported having had a sexual encounter with a woman in the past 2 years."
Also, if it were only for those who admittedly coerced, etc., then the percentage would have been 100, not 95.1.
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
I believe you are correct. There are some language issues with the writing, imho, that may cause some confusion, but the paper clearly states that:
"Of the final sample of 2,689 men, 95.1% reported having recently used at least one of the strategies to force a woman to have sex" (Results section, para 1)
They then say that the ones who did not were demographically indistinguishable from the 95% group.
Likely the 95% group then received follow up questions.
-
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
I believe you are correct. There are some language issues with the writing, imho, that may cause some confusion, but the paper clearly states that:
"Of the final sample of 2,689 men, 95.1% reported having recently used at least one of the strategies to force a woman to have sex" (Results section, para 1)
They then say that the ones who did not were demographically indistinguishable from the 95% group.
Likely the 95% group then received follow up questions.
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
Certainly, the wording of the original request for participants may have turned off many men who would never use the strategies --- the wording was basically "let's hear the men's side of the story". If you have never been in a he-said / she-said situation, you may not have signed up for the research.
My feeling is that this is important research, and further research is needed.
-
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
Certainly, the wording of the original request for participants may have turned off many men who would never use the strategies --- the wording was basically "let's hear the men's side of the story". If you have never been in a he-said / she-said situation, you may not have signed up for the research.
My feeling is that this is important research, and further research is needed.
I think is really valuable work, and it is important to document in the literature the strategies that are used by aggressors to force woman to have sex.
But I also think that in this particular instance finding information towards their RQ1 (what % of men..) is in conflict with their other RQ (how effective are the strategies, etc).
-
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
Certainly, the wording of the original request for participants may have turned off many men who would never use the strategies --- the wording was basically "let's hear the men's side of the story". If you have never been in a he-said / she-said situation, you may not have signed up for the research.
My feeling is that this is important research, and further research is needed.
@LeslieBurns @gabriel @amydiehl
Let me emphasize the "may not have signed up". We don't know. (So, more research.)
BUT, the number of men who do these things should be as close to zero as nature / nurture allows. There will always be some who are willing to hurt others for their own selfish reasons. However, there is no ethically acceptable reason for the # in any given society to be in double digits, much less 60, 80, or 95%.
We can do better. Seems like we could barely do worse.
-
Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630
RE: https://mstdn.social/@MaryAustinBooks/116398194960868150
No further comment is necessary
-
Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630
@amydiehl @janeishly That's shocking. On the other hand, 100% of women that I know well enough to have this sort of conversation with report being sexually assaulted at some point. So maybe this shouldn't shock me as much as it does.
-
As I say, not me, is what the paper says. You can read it yourself and make up your mind.
I think we need to understand the literature to be able to have strategies to curve this situation. It would be very different if we are talking of 95% of the population or if it the number is different.
Therefore it is important to clarify, in my mind, what the study actually claims.
@gabriel @TomasHradcky The nuance is important indeed. And this has nothing to do with "not all men". The study is not just about perpetrators' modus operandi, it's also about methodology (anonymity and non-judgemental approach), which are essential to understand if one is to grasp the fact that these men know what they're doing (otherwise they'd confess by accident, which they obviously don't). This tells volumes about their line of defense ("oh I lost control"). They don't lose control at all.
-
As I say, not me, is what the paper says. You can read it yourself and make up your mind.
I think we need to understand the literature to be able to have strategies to curve this situation. It would be very different if we are talking of 95% of the population or if it the number is different.
Therefore it is important to clarify, in my mind, what the study actually claims.
Again, you don't know it's not also 95% of all men. A number you claim is shocking to you.
And yet, you continue to insist 95% is too broad an assumption that upsets you because women might be asserting it's all men or a lot of men. No one except you brought up 100% all men. Then you got upset about it.
Sealion much?
I love that you insist on being blocked. Like 95% of all #Replyguys who responded to this post.
-
Study (N=2,689) of men (18-34) finds 95.1% reported using strategies to get a woman to have sex who they knew did not want sex & had not consented; 65% successful. Consistent physical pressure & verbal coercion common; overt force, physical restraint, pain also used. https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/08862605261432630
@amydiehl my daughter and her two college age friends went to a restaurant where they were each offered a free drink twice. And they felt the need to explain why they refused it.
