The flaws in this article are so many that I can't begin to address them all. But each of the flaws play to the desires of rapists and others who want to condemn most rape victims and those who actively work to fight rape and to help rape victims.
Make no mistake this isn't an article which is advocating taking a better approach to a real and serious problem. Mac Donald claims that research by Mary Koss disrespects women by asking those surveyed about sexual violence in terms other than "have you been raped?" Labeling a woman who was forced to have sex as a rape victim is disrespectful of women with no concern about whether the alternative language matches criminal statutes, but the men who force woman and girls to have sex are not labeled as disrespectful of women.Go figure.
None of this crisis response occurs, of course—because the [college campus rape] crisis doesn’t exist.
This is a circular proof which very conveniently uses her apathy and her disdain and that of many others like her as proof that they are not only right to be apathetic and disdainful. It is their moral duty to be apathetic and disdainful and to attack everyone who is not apathetic or disdainful.
She writes of self-proclaimed rape survivors but never writes of self-proclaimed falsely accused. No wonder she, who views all feminist claims with suspicion and plenty of scrutiny, writes: "As Stuart Taylor and K. C. Johnson point out in their book Until Proven Innocent, however, the rate of false reports is at least 9 percent and probably closer to 50 percent."
If a journalist and a history professor make a claim in a book then it must be true -- no scrutiny required.
Feminists must respect the self-applied labels used by those who do and don't identify what happened to them as rape even if what happened to them met the legal standard for criminal sexual assault, but Mac Donald doesn't have to respect those who do identify what happened to them as rape.Go figure.
It is important to note that Taylor and Johnson quoted Linda Fairstein in their book to help prove this statistical range, but their quote which included "about 50% simply did not happen" was inaccurate and I have yet to discover the methodology used for their revised estimate of 10 to 15 percent for false rape reports attributed to Fairstein. Notably this number is still higher than what was attributed to Fairstein at a Cosmo panel on date rape.
Because of the methodology Mac Donald used to dismiss Koss's survey results she must also dismiss all other studies where any observer decides who deserves the label of real rape victim in any way other than the person's initial report. This includes studies which support Mac Donald's clear bias. What this means is that Mac Donald has zero support for disproving a 2% rate of false rape reports.
But this is an attack piece on what Mac Donald disingenuously calls the rape industry. Her target audience doesn't want her to be skeptical of or precise about their favorite claims. If there is insufficient response to an identified problem then it must be true that the identified problem is false and that the current insufficient response must be dismantled.
Insufficient response to poverty? Proof that poverty is rare. Yet would anyone call food shelves and other agencies working to fight poverty around the country poverty industries which need to be dismantled? I hope not.
This is coldbloodedness at it's worst. Smug and welcome in too many places.
Labels: Violence Against Women