@pukeblood Except that she deliberately misundeerstood his statements and doesn't seem to be very good with the actual science.

How credible is this: https://itsgoingdown.org/neo-nazis-4chan-ready-new-poster-campaign-target-womens-studies-departments-campus-january-21st/
?

Did some lurking on 4chan and alt-right discords and found nothing suggesting it hasn't lost steam

I know nothing about IGD and was sent the post and asked to check its credibility. Idrc about the source but from the lack of knowledge of the event in this discord and others i'm fairly sure there isn't much to it. thanks tho. Also /pol/ seems pretty far alt-right to me, so my experience with 4chan in recent years doesn't really mesh with that account.

but then again, /pol/ is hardly a fair sample.

All of that may be true, but if we go there right now, is a 50-50 mix of random stuff and hateful shit-posting

Yeah the request to verify came from a lefty prof of mine. Not surprising

I think she's a pretty fair teacher on her topics. She's not pro-antifa or anything and she covers he topics fairly well. She's far from apolitical but i don't think there is anything wrong with that. College is about encountering people who disagree with you

(I don't mean to sound defensive of her or offended, I'm not)

Are you wary of anyone who takes the far-right seriously?

Don't you think its important to be presented with a diversity of opinions, some of them absurd but seriously defended when in college?

Idk, there are some 'extreme' views that I like. (I'm partial to minarchism).

I think there are plenty of far-right and left views that are worth being exposed to and engaging with.

Sexual violence on campus is definitely a real problem.

Compared to sexual violence off campus

Err this is the awkward part, I actually useds to generate the statistics at my campus.

But i can't present them or discuss them intimately because of legal stuff

I can't speak to that.

All i can say with relative certainty, is that on my campus (and i've heard this is normal) the number of reported sexual incidents on surveys is much higher than normal. it depends on a lot of things of course, how do you define sexual violence/rape, what counts as on campus and so on

But what is unequivocally clear is that college-aged girls who actually attend university are very much at risk of victimization

That said, the 1 in 5 statistic is laughably hyperbolic

I've never seen a study that included sex while intoxicated

And i've read a number of them

Well that's obvious

But you have to consider how often sexual violence goes unreported

And that crime is a much broader category than sexual violence

?

For both sides???

Oh, yeah of course. All I'm saying is that you can't look at crime rates and go, oh so rape is less of a thing on campus then off. Because crime is a very broad category and is confounded by a lot of variables. I think the best way to get at sexual violence rates is to ask people directly with surveys.

Its far from perfect, but you are way less likely to get false positives then false negatives

@I AM ERROR, Summers is a bit off on that point.

That's not why she is off and we have to be clear about what the 1 in 5 claim really is.

I mean you've literally ripped her talking point word for word so that would surprise me. Okay. But the actually 'study' was about sexual misconduct.

She compares that to Congo's rape stats, which is far from apples to apples

?

The survey found that 1,073 women, or 19 percent, said that they experienced attempted or completed sexual assault since entering college. The actual breakdown was that 12.6 percent experienced attempted sexual assault and 13.7 percent experienced actual sexual assault. (There was some overlap.)

https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/fact-checker/wp/2014/05/01/one-in-five-women-in-college-sexually-assaulted-the-source-of-this-statistic/?utm_term=.eb987237232a

https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/221153.pdf

This a voluntary response study over two universities. It's got a lot of problems but that number includes 'attempted sexual assault' which if memory serves, was far too broadly defined for my liking.

> what exactly qualifies as sexual assault?

The first page of the linked study goes into this in detail

To your second point, Idk, I didn't do that. People are misinformed about this stuff a lot and the politicization doesn't help

@ping Yes it does, so?

No, it counts sex where someone is so drunk that they cannot meaningfully conest

It reads stop what was happening because you were drunk

Not, just "were drunk"

Yes but @I AM ERROR is right, there is a small under reporting bias because passed out people might not know they were raped/assaulted

Though it might actaully result in over-reporting from people who are unsure and so think they did. This seems unlikely to me

@ping, you can definitely consent while drunk according to this survey. The point is that you can't stop your abuser because you are so intoxicated you can't move and so on. It's definitely a bit of a grey area but nothing as bad as "drunk sex = rape"

-sigh- And thus you should assume that you can.

Why would they need to state, by the way, you know that kind of sex that happens the most

We don't think that is rape

This is borderline deliberate misundertanding now @ping

give me a person who thinks drunk people can't consent

And who has published anything in this field

Like 1 single person

And i doubt those people have published anything.

I suppose that much is true. That said, the question clearly states "unable to provide consent or stop what was happening
because you were... drunk"

If someone interprets that as "I took 1 shot, I was raped!" then sure, but i see no evidence that that is a significant issue.

No reasonable person is going to look back at pleasant sexual experience while intoxicated and report it as rape because they were intoxicated

But what % of the population consists of people like mattress girl

The major problem with this study is it was voluntary response. People went online and answered because they wanted to, not because the survey was palced in front of them. They had to be motivated to take it.

Which is going to select for victims

So say 5% of respondents did that (i don't think so but w.e)

That sifts the numbert marginally

@I AM ERROR, I feel like you don't do a lot of social sciences research

Then you should probably refrain from laying down the law on this stuff.

Oh please, it's got its problems but the socials ciences have been producing meaningful work for almost 100 years

And " well... voluntary response disqualifies the study completely. if it's not random selection it has no value to me" is a pretty absurd thing to say

Like I'm sorry sociology isn't physics?

That's just not what happened here...

I mean the survey was posted online and people were offered 10 dollars on amazon to take it

I'm not sure how knowledge of the survey was disseminated

Pls hold

@I AM ERROR see 3.1.3

@I AM ERROR To recruit the students who were sampled to participate in the CSA Study, we relied on both
recruitment e-mails and hard copy recruitment letters that were mailed to potential
respondents. Sampled students were sent an initial recruitment e-mail that described the
study, provided each student with a unique CSA Study ID#, and included a hyperlink to the
CSA Study Web site. During each of the following 2 weeks, students who had not completed
the survey were sent a follow-up e-mail encouraging them to participate. The third week,
nonrespondents were mailed a hard-copy recruitment letter. Two weeks after the hard-copy
letters were mailed, nonrespondents were sent a final recruitment e-mail. The overall
response rates for survey completion for the undergraduate women sampled at the two
universities were 42.2% and 42.8%, respectively. The response rates for males were lower.
Exhibit 3-1 depicts the response rates in relation to the sampling frames and subframes.
Procedures for addressing response bias are discussed in more detail in the analysis section.

@ping what?

Over 1k males were considered?

Scrool to 3.1.3 and look at the bottom of exhibit 3-1

Yes they did

@I AM ERROR, you want them to ambush people with a rape survey?

@I AM ERROR, that would literally never get past IRB and for good reason

@ping, i see literally 0 evidence of that.

that's not really p-hacking

I don't think their questions are overly vague

@I AM ERROR, i don't mind that methodology, but they still have to be able to leave the survey after finding out what it is

@ping I haven't looked nearly closely enough to know what the effects of their filters were'

@I AM ERROR, agreed, that is a flaw in the survey. It's far from disqualifying, but its a problem

@I AM ERROR, I never said you couldn't criticize the study. You can and should do that with all information presented to you

@I AM ERROR, you should be less certain of your critiques

Its hard to say what the effects of that were and its unfair to just disregard the study. Here is the thing. If you issue a survey at a college with 20k people

And get 2k responses

And 20% of them are affirmative

Then you know for sure

that 20% of 2k people

reported sexual violence

('were raped seems strong)

And so you know a minimum rate for the campus (the absurd case in which every victim responded)

idk let me see

3.1.3 and 3.2.2 should be of interest to you

and 6.2 and 6.3 perhaps

afaik there is no posting of the survey