Jump to content

Fall 2017 allegations against unnamed players (aka Situation 2)


DoctorB

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 9k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

4 minutes ago, NH said:

Among undergraduate students, 23.1% of females experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence or incapacitation.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/why-the-new-one-in-four-campus-rape-statistic-is-misleading

The study clashes with data gathered by the Justice Department between 1995 and 2013, which found that college-age women who aren’t students are more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than women who are students. The number of victims was significantly lower than those in other recent surveys: 7.6 of 1,000 non-students compared to 6.1 of 1,000 students.

TheA_Bomb likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, NH said:

Among undergraduate students, 23.1% of females experience rape or sexual assault through physical force, violence or incapacitation.

Only 20% of female student victims report the crime to law enforcement.

Nobody on this board knows what happened. It seems a large group would like to assume the charges (of which we do not know the literal details) are false, made-up or maliciousness. I hope the accused get fair treatment and adequate representation, but I think the accusers should be given some benefit of the doubt as well.

College females are less likely to be a victim of sexual assault than non student females the same age. College females are 50% more likely to report sexual assault than females in the same age group that are not college students. The numbers are too high, but to act like that going to college makes females more likely targets for sexual assault is just false.  

TheA_Bomb likes this
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, 3star_recruit said:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/why-the-new-one-in-four-campus-rape-statistic-is-misleading

The study clashes with data gathered by the Justice Department between 1995 and 2013, which found that college-age women who aren’t students are more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than women who are students. The number of victims was significantly lower than those in other recent surveys: 7.6 of 1,000 non-students compared to 6.1 of 1,000 students.

Also just logically his unsourced statistics put assault at about 1/4 why would anyone pay to go to school?  Those rates are higher than war torn Sudan.  All this as female students out number male students in universities. The great statistic you see is about the huge number of unreported cases. How'd they measure that one?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It all depends on the definition of sexual assault.  The legal definition and the school's definition don't always line up.  If you define assault as something that makes you feel uncomfortable then those numbers are low.  If you define assault as forcible rape then the numbers are ridiculously high. Another problem with the statistics can be seen when you lump a bunch of things together. 100% of college attendees have been raped, assaulted, hooted at, felt uncomfortable, asked out, or eaten a meal on campus. It's an epidemic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

NH you need to read the actual studies that these activists always point to to make their claim that college campuses are one of the most dangerous places for girls.... it's a farce

 

it is sad that this stat has been pushed so much when these "studies" are loose surveys answered by specific groups of girls who may have an agenda with questions that consider something as mundane as the wind blowing = sexual assault. 

 

The pendelum has really swung in a lot of these social justice debates and they have now crossed lines I think most couldn't imagine. Their is little basis of fact in anything anymore.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, 3star_recruit said:

http://www.thedailybeast.com/why-the-new-one-in-four-campus-rape-statistic-is-misleading

The study clashes with data gathered by the Justice Department between 1995 and 2013, which found that college-age women who aren’t students are more likely to be raped or sexually assaulted than women who are students. The number of victims was significantly lower than those in other recent surveys: 7.6 of 1,000 non-students compared to 6.1 of 1,000 students.

So if you read the article it says "11 percent of female undergraduates said they were assaulted in a way that is consistent with criminal definitions of rape or sodomy. Half of these female undergrads said force was involved, while the other half maintained they were incapacitated by alcohol."

The article also ends by praising the study as the best/most nuanced study of college sexual assault yet. So 23% is an outrageous number to cite, but 11% is still outrageously high.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, milwaukeebill said:

So if you read the article it says "11 percent of female undergraduates said they were assaulted in a way that is consistent with criminal definitions of rape or sodomy. Half of these female undergrads said force was involved, while the other half maintained they were incapacitated by alcohol."

The article also ends by praising the study as the best/most nuanced study of college sexual assault yet. So 23% is an outrageous number to cite, but 11% is still outrageously high.

 

Which all still means that college females are at significantly lower risk of sexual assault than non college females the same age. The numbers are too high, but this is a societal problem not a college problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I am feeling more confident this could end up being ok based on the info with the tape. IF the tape shows it all is clearly consensual (all parties involved having a good time) that goes a long way.  The SLU Kangaroo court better not screw the players if this is the case and the cops clear them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 minutes ago, TheA_Bomb said:

Also just logically his unsourced statistics put assault at about 1/4 why would anyone pay to go to school?  Those rates are higher than war torn Sudan.  All this as female students out number male students in universities. The great statistic you see is about the huge number of unreported cases. How'd they measure that one?

The statistics I cited were from the National Sexual Violence Resource Center. Their statistics were cited from a Nationals Institute of Justice report published by professors from the University of Cincinnati and UNC-Chapel Hill. I have not read the studies.

My point is not to say that being in college makes one any more or less likely to be a victim of sexual assault. My point is that sexual assault on college campuses is a real problem and that I think it's dangerous to make assumptions regarding either accusers or victims. 

Abomb to your point regarding the number of cases that go unreported, these were web surveys done after the fact by students (both male and female) at two public universities. I'm sure that data is not bullet proof. But to write it off entirely still feels dangerous to me.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, brianstl said:

Which all still means that college females are at significantly lower risk of sexual assault than non college females the same age. The numbers are too high, but this is a societal problem not a college problem.

Yeah. But I guess were all on this board cause we care about SLU - SLU cant really do a ton about the societal problem.  I do think we would all prefer they try to lower that number on their campus at least.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 minutes ago, NH said:

 Abomb to your point regarding the number of cases that go unreported, these were web surveys done after the fact by students (both male and female) at two public universities. I'm sure that data is not bullet proof. But to write it off entirely still feels dangerous to me.

The study writes itself off.  1) It's factually incorrect and 2) the methodology (Web only, less than 6000 respondents, limited to two public universities) is far too little data on which to make national projections.  The data gathered by the Justice Department implies that their study is off by a factor of 10.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, 3star_recruit said:

The study writes itself off.  1) It's factually incorrect and 2) the methodology (Web only, less than 6000 respondents, limited to two public universities) is far too little data on which to make national projections.  The data gathered by the Justice Department implies that their study is off by a factor of 10.  

The justice department study (which I just read) notes the other study I referenced in its findings and acknowledges that the two cannot be compared due to different definitions of sexual assault. 

The Washington Post also noted that the first study I referenced was not statistically significant enough to make national projections. However, the Washington Post also conducted a follow-up study which also found 1/5 women were victims of sexual assault on campus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, NH said:

The justice department study (which I just read) notes the other study I referenced in its findings and acknowledges that the two cannot be compared due to different definitions of sexual assault. 

The Washington Post also noted that the first study I referenced was not statistically significant enough to make national projections. However, the Washington Post also conducted a follow-up study which also found 1/5 women were victims of sexual assault on campus.

Can you link this study of 20% of all college women are victims of sexual assault?  I would love to see how it was conducted. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, WestCoastBilliken said:

Can you link this study of 20% of all college women are victims of sexual assault?  I would love to see how it was conducted. 

Sure, see here: http://apps.washingtonpost.com/g/page/national/washington-post-kaiser-family-foundation-survey-of-college-students-on-sexual-assault/1726/

 

I'm sure there will be some flaws with it. Again, that's not really my point here. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said:

Wow, BREAKING NEWS.

I guess it took a while to get the string nice and tight between the two cans or maybe just read the Post and take a day or two to digest it......

 

 

I don't think we should be mad at them for taking a day or two to digest this before reporting on it. This could have been a massive slip up with serious consequences for the SAs involved if they reported the story in the wrong way.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, billikenfan05 said:

I don't think we should be mad at them for taking a day or two to digest this before reporting on it. This could have been a massive slip up with serious consequences for the SAs involved if they reported the story in the wrong way.

I thought about that after I typed it.  It's just the "breaking news" tag that caused me to cackle..... 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

If they have any brains at all they have already recognized the immense amount of liability they might have to deal with if they screw up with their information releases. They have to deal with this issue very carefully and this means they will take their time doing it.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...