• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college

Dibbler

Dibbler

Banned
DP Veteran
Joined
Feb 16, 2013
Messages
1,543
Reaction score
680
Location
East Coast USA
Gender
Undisclosed
Political Leaning
Undisclosed
Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college

Conservative icon Phyllis Schlafly is worried that college campuses are populated by too many women, a phenomenon she insinuated has contributed to increased sexual assault on campus.

In a Monday column for the far-right website World Net Daily, the longtime anti-feminist crusader lamented the declining portion of university enrollments accounted for by men. Schlafly — BA and JD, Washington University in St. Louis; MA, Radcliffe College — argued that it may even be time to implement quotas to ensure that men constitute at least half of a college’s enrollment.

“Long ago when I went to college, campuses were about 70 percent male, and until 1970 it was still nearly 60 percent,” Schlafly wrote. “Today, however, the male percentage has fallen to the low 40s on most campuses.”

Never one to shirk victim-blaming, Schlafly proceeded to link the problem of campus sexual assault to the increased enrollment of women in postsecondary institutions.

“Boys are more likely than girls to look at the cost-benefit tradeoff of going to college,” Schlafly asserted. “The imbalance of far more women than men at colleges has been a factor in the various sex scandals that have made news in the last couple of years.”
Click to expand...

continued at link: Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college - Salon.com

There are people that do go to college that don't really belong there, both sexes, maybe even up to a third of students at any given university are just there to party and the institution appreciates their tuition payments, or their parents payments. I am put off by this Schlafly person saying that it's women's fault that campuses are increasingly unsafe. (The current dialectic concerning increased sexual assault on campuses is up for scrutiny.) What is this persons agenda and is she a front person for some organization ?
 
What does any of what she's talking about have to do with rape?
 
What a complete tool. Because Phyllis Schlafly is saying that too many women going to college means an increase in campus sex assaults, she is inherently (even if not admitting it) saying that sexual assaults anywhere are the fault of women. Concentration becomes the factor. Too many women, too many assaults... and that is beyond asinine. No where in her article (linked from the OP article) is putting blame where it should be. On those who rape, and holding them responsible for it.
 
Dibbler said:
Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college



continued at link: Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college - Salon.com

There are people that do go to college that don't really belong there, both sexes, maybe even up to a third of students at any given university are just there to party and the institution appreciates their tuition payments, or their parents payments. I am put off by this Schlafly person saying that it's women's fault that campuses are increasingly unsafe. (The current dialectic concerning increased sexual assault on campuses is up for scrutiny.) What is this persons agenda and is she a front person for some organization ?
Click to expand...

I don't like Schlafly at all, but leave it to a rag like Salon to completely warp the observations she made in her column. Geeze, the National Enquirer does a better job than the tools at Salon.
 
I have a point . . . bear with me, I'm not excusing what she said. I'm trying to point out that there's a deeper issue, here.

Aside how insane she seems to be on this . . . I actually see what her 'logic' is, here. Her logic is this: the statistical percentage is static. She's falsely giving an absolute to a variable. More people = more victims *if* the # of women is always [example] a flat 10% of the populous. 10% of 100 = 10. 10% of 1000 = 100. Imagine if we all looked at all crime in this way - lol - hello genocide. "If we just kill __ people off then we reduce them as victims / criminals" - [she is a bit nuts for that]

But she's drawing the wrong conclusion from the statistics [duh]. This isn't a crime of convenience or social ails [like how selling drugs or doing other unethical activities to cover expenses tends to decrease when people are poor because it pays better than a regular ethical job. Thus - when poverty rises, crime might rise as well]. Rape and sexual assault is a crime of mental issues and the urge to control others in barbaric ways [wanting to demoralize the victim and putting one's urges above ethics, etc]. If the female population outnumbers the male population - then the assaults should decrease, not increase, purely because it thus requires more males to participate in such an activity. It's not a perpetratorless crime.

If the victims increase due to just having more people - then why are perpetrators also increasing when their population is less?

So - why are more guys violating women? Why has the number of perpetrators increased exponentially?

If the male population overall is decreased - yet their participation in a type of crime increases - then that suggests that the female population is at a static # (the example is 10% - no matter what) then why are, what, twice as many men perpetrating?

That's actually what's going on, according to what she's referencing - more guys are participating in such behavior. How many more? Twice as many? How many males would have to violate women in order to make her statement true?

So all of that above just sort of throws her 'point' in the trash from a logical standpoint. She's ignoring these things: People might be reporting more crimes against themselves - this might show victim-support has improved and victims aren't being passive these days. Or it could mean that the old statistics were horridly under-factored [like - several types of situations weren't logged as rape because they missed __ element].

So yeah - she's stupid.
But her stupidity highlights something that might be a serious problem: if there are less men - but their collective role in a crime has increased - then that means a greater number of men have done this crime. That's a serious problem right there, if it's accurate at all.

Does this make sense to you? She's focusing on the potential 'victim' number and saying that the population is a problem. But she should be focusing on the very ****ed up issue of less men = more crime committed by these fewer men. Don't know about you, but that is beyond disturbing to me.

And I'm not sure why she's doing that. I think - when it comes to sexual assault - we tend to focus and discuss more about victim statistics than perpetrator statistics.

What are the perpetrator statistics? They always give some sort of victim # [like - 1 out of every 20 women will be sexually assaulted in her life]. Then what does that mean for the perps? 1 out of every 15 men will commit sexual assault? [etc]. Why is it that we do this - not just her, but our entire society? Why is it all about the victim numbers and much less about the perpetrators?

I mean - here we are were advice for how not to become a victim is commonplace, but what about guidance for not becoming a perpetrator? At what point does that start? Victims happen at random - but a perpetrator develops over a period of time. That's why they're harder to 'prevent'.
 
Last edited:
Keep your wimmins at home, where they belong!
 
ecofarm said:
Keep your wimmins at home, where they belong!
Click to expand...

Indeed, the sandwhich makers must stay in the kitchen, nevermind anywhere else in the house!

(gets smacked by mom, sister, and self)

nevermind...
 
Luftwaffe said:
Indeed, the sandwhich makers must stay in the kitchen, nevermind anywhere else in the house!

(gets smacked by mom, sister, and self)

nevermind...
Click to expand...


If the sandwich maker is unrelated, it should be in an assless burka.
 
You know what else correlates with the rise in sexual assaults? A rise in the number of black people at universities...


Just sayin'!
 
ecofarm said:
You know what else correlates with a rise in sexual assaults? A rise in the number of black people at universities...

Just sayin'!
Click to expand...

You trying to make this worse?
 
Dragonfly said:
Is there any category of crime where men don't FAR outnumber women in terms of being the perpetrator?
Click to expand...

Well it's not really that - it's that, according to her logic, men are even far outnumbering their selves. That means that the # of men perpetrating such crimes has increased by, what, 1.5 to 2% - maybe more. 3%?

For some reason I find that hard to believe - so I imagine it's not that there's a major increase, it's that things are just being reported more often.
 
Dragonfly said:
Is there any category of crime where men don't FAR outnumber women in terms of being the perpetrator?
Click to expand...

Men don't really far outnumber women in rape. According to statistics from the 2010 NIPSV Study, 40.5% of rapists are women.
 
Dibbler said:
Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college



continued at link: Phyllis Schlafly: Campus sex assault is on the rise because too many women go to college - Salon.com

There are people that do go to college that don't really belong there, both sexes, maybe even up to a third of students at any given university are just there to party and the institution appreciates their tuition payments, or their parents payments. I am put off by this Schlafly person saying that it's women's fault that campuses are increasingly unsafe. (The current dialectic concerning increased sexual assault on campuses is up for scrutiny.) What is this persons agenda and is she a front person for some organization ?
Click to expand...

Interesting. One would think that the assault on women should increase if there are less women in college, because now when there are more women than men in colleges, men are more likely to be able to have a wider choice range.
 
LZRD WZRD said:
Wow, that rebuttal really brought me to my knees. Good one
Click to expand...

Well, your claim does sound like complete tripe. Sorry.

Btw, I just read the page of the report you got that from and you should re-read it. It does not say what you think it does.
 
Henrin said:
Well, your claim does sound like complete tripe. Sorry.
Click to expand...

When factoring in males being forced to penetrate (which is legally considered rape), you get this: In 12 months there was an estimated 1,270,000 cases of females being raped. At this same time, 1,267,000 males were forced to penetrate.

Next, of the 1,270,000 females who were raped, 98.1% were raped by men. Of the 1,267,000 men forced to penetrate, 79.2% were made to penetrate by a woman. This leaves us with 263,536 men forcing men to penetrate and 1,245,870 men who raped women. You also have 24,130 women who raped women and 1,027,464 women who forced men to penetrate. When adding this up, you get 1,509,406 male rapists and 1,027,594 female rapists. This indicates that 40.5% of rapists in the United States are women.
 
LZRD WZRD said:
Wow, that rebuttal really brought me to my knees. Good one
Click to expand...

First of all, common sense will tell you that's rubbish on many levels.

Secondly, a google search will reveal that the "math" used to invent that ratio was highly flawed.
 
LZRD WZRD said:
When factoring in males being forced to penetrate (which is legally considered rape), you get this: In 12 months there was an estimated 1,270,000 cases of females being raped. At this same time, 1,267,000 males were forced to penetrate.

Next, of the 1,270,000 females who were raped, 98.1% were raped by men. Of the 1,267,000 men forced to penetrate, 79.2% were made to penetrate by a woman. This leaves us with 263,536 men forcing men to penetrate and 1,245,870 men who raped women. You also have 24,130 women who raped women and 1,027,464 women who forced men to penetrate. When adding this up, you get 1,509,406 male rapists and 1,027,594 female rapists. This indicates that 40.5% of rapists in the United States are women.
Click to expand...

Since I still have the report open in another tab, can you provide the page number for those numbers?
 
Dragonfly said:
First of all, common sense will tell you that's rubbish on many levels.

Secondly, a google search will reveal that the "math" used to invent that ratio was highly flawed.
Click to expand...

Really? What's your source?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom