There is an assumption of organised matches here.tom p wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:56 pmAnd if someone goes beyond the expected/allowed degree of contact, then not only is there a referee on-hand to administer in-game justice; but the victim can even have recourse to the law should the assault be too great.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:22 amNo, they couldn't fall under the exception of a contact sport. That applies to sports like football or rugby which have well defined rules. A person who plays football can be assumed to have consented to a certain amount of shoving etc, because they know in advance what is allowed.Rex Piat wrote: ↑Mon Dec 02, 2019 12:14 pmIn the absence of far greater detail there is no way to tie any of the responses (except those for non consensual action of choking, but which the survey does not dis-aggregate) to legal definitions of assault, all could fall within the notion given in the sentencing guild line link of 'contact sport',
Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Stephanie
- Stummy Beige
- Posts: 2902
- Joined: Wed Sep 25, 2019 4:38 pm
- Location: clinging tenaciously to your buttocks
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
[mod]I've split another couple of posts I missed off, apologies for that, if I've missed any others, please do report so I can make sure everything is in the right thread - Stephanie[/mod]
"I got a flu virus named after me 'cause I kissed a bat on a dare."
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
I don't think you've got the numbers right, there.
Question 2 had as its base 'All respondents who select 'have experienced' slapping, choking, gagging or spitting at Q1'. It has 1416 respondents, out of 2002 in Q1. 1416/2002=0.707 experiencing those forms of abuse. (We don't know anything about those who 'prefer not to say')
Adding up those who had experienced those acts unwillingly, be it sometimes (29%), most of the time (14%) or all of the time (10%) we get 53% of respondents.
So it's 53% of the 70.7% of original respondents, which gives 37.4865% by my maths, of women who confirm that they have experienced unwanted slapping, choking, gagging or spitting during consensual sex.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
The same applies to disorganized matches. A reasonable person would be able to assume that a game of football would involve some physical contact, but also that other acts would not occur. For example, they could be assumed to have consented to shoving, but not to being bitten.username wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:09 pmThere is an assumption of organised matches here.tom p wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 12:56 pmAnd if someone goes beyond the expected/allowed degree of contact, then not only is there a referee on-hand to administer in-game justice; but the victim can even have recourse to the law should the assault be too great.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 8:22 am
No, they couldn't fall under the exception of a contact sport. That applies to sports like football or rugby which have well defined rules. A person who plays football can be assumed to have consented to a certain amount of shoving etc, because they know in advance what is allowed.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Yes, my mistake. Thanks for putting me right.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:27 pmI don't think you've got the numbers right, there.
Question 2 had as its base 'All respondents who select 'have experienced' slapping, choking, gagging or spitting at Q1'. It has 1416 respondents, out of 2002 in Q1. 1416/2002=0.707 experiencing those forms of abuse. (We don't know anything about those who 'prefer not to say')
Adding up those who had experienced those acts unwillingly, be it sometimes (29%), most of the time (14%) or all of the time (10%) we get 53% of respondents.
So it's 53% of the 70.7% of original respondents, which gives 37.4865% by my maths, of women who confirm that they have experienced unwanted slapping, choking, gagging or spitting during consensual sex.
My avatar was a scientific result that was later found to be 'mistaken' - I rarely claim to be 100% correct
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
ETA 5/8/20: I've been advised that the result was correct, it was the initial interpretation that needed to be withdrawn
Meta? I'd say so!
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Yes, but rules are fluid and vary by groups of participants ime. Referees are not always present. Not every infraction of the rules elevates to the level of assault even when it breaks the rules; people might join a pickup game which was stricter or less strict than expected.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:34 pmThe same applies to disorganized matches. A reasonable person would be able to assume that a game of football would involve some physical contact, but also that other acts would not occur. For example, they could be assumed to have consented to shoving, but not to being bitten.
The bright lines we like to draw on paper do not always exist in three dimensions.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Woodchopper
- Princess POW
- Posts: 7144
- Joined: Sat Oct 12, 2019 9:05 am
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Certainly, and such fuzzy situations are what courts are for.username wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 2:12 pmYes, but rules are fluid and vary by groups of participants ime. Referees are not always present. Not every infraction of the rules elevates to the level of assault even when it breaks the rules; people might join a pickup game which was stricter or less strict than expected.Woodchopper wrote: ↑Tue Dec 03, 2019 1:34 pmThe same applies to disorganized matches. A reasonable person would be able to assume that a game of football would involve some physical contact, but also that other acts would not occur. For example, they could be assumed to have consented to shoving, but not to being bitten.
The bright lines we like to draw on paper do not always exist in three dimensions.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Yes, ultimately.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Except that some things are not fuzzy.
In any game of footy in the park, hacking someone down or punching them in the face would neither be permitted nor tolerated and only a shitbag would do it
In this analogy, tackling, shoulder-barging and the other normal/borderline contact would be like scratching or light spanking or similar during sex. Some folks will be up for it, others would say no.
Hacking, elbowing, punching or spitting are like choking or slapping or punching or spitting on someone without request or prior consent/expectation during sex.
It's not nearly as difficult as you're making out. The grey areas are actually pretty small and easily negotiated by starting gently.
In any game of footy in the park, hacking someone down or punching them in the face would neither be permitted nor tolerated and only a shitbag would do it
In this analogy, tackling, shoulder-barging and the other normal/borderline contact would be like scratching or light spanking or similar during sex. Some folks will be up for it, others would say no.
Hacking, elbowing, punching or spitting are like choking or slapping or punching or spitting on someone without request or prior consent/expectation during sex.
It's not nearly as difficult as you're making out. The grey areas are actually pretty small and easily negotiated by starting gently.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Which is part of the problem with the survey. Much as there's a rush to pretend the terms are unambiguous, they are not, and they are lumped together in a way which renders the output quantitatively hollow.tom p wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:37 pmExcept that some things are not fuzzy.
In any game of footy in the park, hacking someone down or punching them in the face would neither be permitted nor tolerated and only a shitbag would do it
In this analogy, tackling, shoulder-barging and the other normal/borderline contact would be like scratching or light spanking or similar during sex. Some folks will be up for it, others would say no.
Hacking, elbowing, punching or spitting are like choking or slapping or punching or spitting on someone without request or prior consent/expectation during sex.
It's not nearly as difficult as you're making out. The grey areas are actually pretty small and easily negotiated by starting gently.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
I think the key point of the survey, though, is that the behaviours were unwanted.username wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 7:56 pmWhich is part of the problem with the survey. Much as there's a rush to pretend the terms are unambiguous, they are not, and they are lumped together in a way which renders the output quantitatively hollow.tom p wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 12:37 pmExcept that some things are not fuzzy.
In any game of footy in the park, hacking someone down or punching them in the face would neither be permitted nor tolerated and only a shitbag would do it
In this analogy, tackling, shoulder-barging and the other normal/borderline contact would be like scratching or light spanking or similar during sex. Some folks will be up for it, others would say no.
Hacking, elbowing, punching or spitting are like choking or slapping or punching or spitting on someone without request or prior consent/expectation during sex.
It's not nearly as difficult as you're making out. The grey areas are actually pretty small and easily negotiated by starting gently.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Sometimes over an unspecified period with an unspecified number of interactions some rather poorly defined actions were unwanted.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Exactly.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
I'm glad you agree with my summary of the survey. It doesn't tell us much, does it?
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
I think a lot of people were surprised and disappointed by the number of women who had unwantedly experienced those actions at all, as (however you define them) that would be unpleasant.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
A. No one is surprised that it happensBird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:54 pmI think a lot of people were surprised and disappointed by the number of women who had unwantedly experienced those actions at all, as (however you define them) that would be unpleasant.
B. The numbers are unreliable for the aforementioned reasons.
Seriously, this survey wouldn't pass muster with a junior marketing executive.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
What's your evidence for A? Some posters in the thread sound surprised to me.username wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:59 pmA. No one is surprised that it happensBird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 8:54 pmI think a lot of people were surprised and disappointed by the number of women who had unwantedly experienced those actions at all, as (however you define them) that would be unpleasant.
B. The numbers are unreliable for the aforementioned reasons.
Seriously, this survey wouldn't pass muster with a junior marketing executive.
As for B, how are the numbers unreliable? Or perhaps a better question is, what do you consider the best-case scenario that is supported by the data?
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
A purely logical argument against A is that most women haven't experienced it, which means that most men aren't doing it, so obviously most people have no direct experience of it. As discussed, it's not something people generally talk about. So most people could be justified in thinking that it's very unusual, rather than quite common.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Wrt people being shocked here, fair enough. In the wider world, depending on how unwanted* is parsed I don't think shocked would work.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:05 pmA purely logical argument against A is that most women haven't experienced it, which means that most men aren't doing it, so obviously most people have no direct experience of it. As discussed, it's not something people generally talk about. So most people could be justified in thinking that it's very unusual, rather than quite common.
*as well as many other things already mentioned.
Eta The data supports very little at all, it being a bit f.cked.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
I think we can safely conclude that about a third of women have been hit, choked, gagged and/or spat on during consensual sex when they didn't want to be.
Do you disagree?
Do you disagree?
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
There is ambiguity in the statement. So I'm going to say that I neither agree or disagree, it's a crappy question. I've talked to people specifically about both hair pulling and spanking who said they didn't want it done badly. Badly meant too little or too much force. Do you see the problem?Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:16 pmI think we can safely conclude that about a third of women have been hit, choked, gagged and/or spat on during consensual sex when they didn't want to be.
Do you disagree?
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
- Bird on a Fire
- Princess POW
- Posts: 10142
- Joined: Fri Oct 11, 2019 5:05 pm
- Location: Portugal
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Hmmm. I'm not sure that's consistent with the wording of the question. I'd be surprised if that covered large proportion of responses
We could narrow it down to just the numbers of people who specifically said they felt pressured, threatened or forced, though.
We could narrow it down to just the numbers of people who specifically said they felt pressured, threatened or forced, though.
We have the right to a clean, healthy, sustainable environment.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
The reader will note how username here has slipped from "surprised" to "shocked" to make his opponent seem unreasonable and hysterical and to give him a straw man to attack later should he need it.username wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:11 pmWrt people being shocked here, fair enough. In the wider world, depending on how unwanted* is parsed I don't think shocked would work.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:05 pmA purely logical argument against A is that most women haven't experienced it, which means that most men aren't doing it, so obviously most people have no direct experience of it. As discussed, it's not something people generally talk about. So most people could be justified in thinking that it's very unusual, rather than quite common.
*as well as many other things already mentioned.
Eta The data supports very little at all, it being a bit f.cked.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Not really. I was out walking in the woods and just used the term carelessly.
I'm not surprised nor shocked such a questionable dataset was used by the bbc to suggest sexual violence was being normalized.
I'm not surprised nor shocked such a questionable dataset was used by the bbc to suggest sexual violence was being normalized.
Last edited by username on Thu Dec 05, 2019 10:24 pm, edited 1 time in total.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.
Re: Survey data discussion split from Male normalisation of sexual violence thread
Not really, pressured is a moot term (was it just persuasion? Repeated requests to try something? Nagging?) That's a very wide gamut of meaning, again, the results fail any reasonable clarity. Thus is highly problematic when they're then used to claim the scale of an issue.Bird on a Fire wrote: ↑Thu Dec 05, 2019 9:29 pmHmmm. I'm not sure that's consistent with the wording of the question. I'd be surprised if that covered large proportion of responses
We could narrow it down to just the numbers of people who specifically said they felt pressured, threatened or forced, though.
Tbh this will probably run for ages. I would be both shocked and surprised for a similarly worded survey to get beyond "well this is a bit sh.t" on almost any other topic.
The half-truths, repeated, authenticated themselves.