> Do you think that Ts'o just needed you to step in and explain how domestic sexual abuse is rape and that he's just being insufficiently awesome[0]?
So you believe that Ts'o claimed that domestic sexual abuse is not rape? Let's see what he actually wrote:
> Also in the survey, in the rapes that were reported via a randomized telephone survey, in 66.9% of those cases, the perpetrator did not threaten to harm or kill the victim. (Which makes it no less a crime, of course, but people may have images of rape which involves a other physical injuries, by a stranger, in some dark and deserted place. The statistics simply don't bear that out)
OK, so it seems that his own words contradict your assertion. Care to explain?
> OK, so it seems that his own words contradict your assertion. Care to explain?
To quote the conclusion:
>> Please note, I am not diminishing what rape is, and or any particular person's experience. However, I am challenging the use of statistics that may be hyperbolic and misleading, and ultimately may be very counterproductive if it causes people to become afraid when the reality might not be as horrible as the "1 in 4" numbers might at first sound.
"Please note, I am not diminishing what rape is but I'd like to diminish the statistics around rape because when I think of rape I think of 80's movies where a brute forces a woman's legs open and not, you know, casual nonviolent stuff."
Ts'o tells us his aim with this, to try and cast doubt on the the way statistics are reported or used by attempting to draw a line between what he nonsensically separates as "violent" and "non-violent" rape. The idea that Rape is not Harm is a bit like suggesting that it's not really Home Robbery if you're not home while the burglar is there. It's like suggesting that if I take your wallet while you're drunk and passed out, I didn't steal from you because you were asking for it. And that you'd be in the wrong if you tried to call it theft, because there were no knives brandished and basically it wasn't stealing.
Did you read the citation carefully? It seems very obvious to me. Your pullquote doesn't even really invalidate my point. Forgive me, but it looks to me like you'd never actually read this article but you went looking through it for the very first quote that met your exoneration criterion, without regard to how it fit into the whole rhetorical structure.
> Did you read the citation carefully? It seems very obvious to me. Your pullquote doesn't even really invalidate my point. Forgive me, but it looks to me like you'd never actually read this article but you went looking through it for the very first quote that met your exoneration criterion, without regard to how it fit into the whole rhetorical structure.
I've read it numerous times, thank you very much, paying close attention to the rhetorical structure and trying to understand the overall point he was trying to communicate.
Clearly, you and I are inclined to interpret his overall intent differently. It does not help your case to put words in his mouth that are patent contradictions of what he actually said.
> I've read it numerous times, thank you very much, paying close attention to the rhetorical structure and trying to understand the overall point he was trying to communicate.
What do you think it is? Because I felt like his very clear definition of what he was challenging and why made his intent pretty clear. Your argument seems to be, "He doesn't want to redefine rape in all cases, just in THIS case which was pertinent to him at the time."
Unless you think there is a broader conclusion that somehow doesn't invalidate his (admittedly confused) post, please lay it out more clearly.
So you believe that Ts'o claimed that domestic sexual abuse is not rape? Let's see what he actually wrote:
> Also in the survey, in the rapes that were reported via a randomized telephone survey, in 66.9% of those cases, the perpetrator did not threaten to harm or kill the victim. (Which makes it no less a crime, of course, but people may have images of rape which involves a other physical injuries, by a stranger, in some dark and deserted place. The statistics simply don't bear that out)
OK, so it seems that his own words contradict your assertion. Care to explain?