Those questions that sometimes you ask. (Trigger warning for forced sex.)

[azurelunatic]

I was reading stuff, and yet again got linked back to the discussion of a 2002 study by Lisak & Miller. The fact that this entry contains a poll, and the mention of that study, is entirely possibly enough to tell some of the people who read me exactly what's going to be in the poll, though I will note that I've added two questions of my own.

Poll #6184 Because I'm grimly curious (trigger warning on questions) - in all cases, prenegotiated scenes with a safeword (etc.) where that safeword was not used count towards 'no' unless you feel for some reason that it should be otherwise.

Open to: Registered Users, detailed results viewable to: Just the Poll Creator, participants: 38

Have you ever been in a situation where you tried, but for various reasons did not succeed, in having sexual intercourse with an adult by using or threatening to use physical force (twisting their arm, holding them down, etc.) if they did not cooperate? (Question from Lisak & Miller)

No
37 (97.4%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
1 (2.6%)

Have you ever had sexual intercourse with someone, even though they did not want to, because they were too intoxicated (on alcohol or drugs) to resist your sexual advances (e.g., removing their clothes)? (Question from Lisak & Miller)

No
37 (97.4%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
1 (2.6%)

Have you ever had sexual intercourse with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate? (Question from Lisak & Miller)

No
38 (100.0%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
0 (0.0%)

Have you ever had oral sex with an adult when they didn’t want to because you used or threatened to use physical force (twisting their arm; holding them down, etc.) if they didn’t cooperate? (Question from Lisak & Miller)

No
38 (100.0%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
0 (0.0%)

If you answered yes to any of questions 1-4, have you received counseling related to this?

Does not apply
37 (97.4%)

No
1 (2.6%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
0 (0.0%)

If you answered yes to any of questions 1-4, would you do this again?

Does not apply
36 (94.7%)

No
1 (2.6%)

Yes
0 (0.0%)

Other
1 (2.6%)

Comments

[amberfox]

Interesting. 2 links down I run across an unfamiliar but useful phrase: "Schrödinger’s Rapist."

[sophie]

Was it deliberate that this poll wasn't made an anonymous poll? I'm worried that some people who might otherwise answer the poll would not, because of that.

[leora]

No, the closest to anything like that I ever came was initiating sexual contact with someone who I had reason to believe was consenting, but then realized was not capable of giving consent at that time. But it didn't go very far, and it was an odd situation where I already had had many past consensual sexual experiences with the person, but misjudged the situation. I didn't bother to get counseling for it. I did apologize. It was really a situation where, at the time, I felt that I was being encouraged, and I just didn't realize consent wasn't capable. I still feel quite bad about it though.

[amberfox]

Is it not anonymous? It says "detailed results viewable to: None", but perhaps that's a change?

[elements]

I imagine that a lot of the people who took that survey in the study didn't think that the other person hadn't wanted to, at least on enough of a conscious level, to answer yes. Which IMHO means that probably a lot of people who should have answered yes to at least one question, didn't, and the stats are under-reporting and otherwise would be even more shocking.

The overt inclusion of the line that the other person *did not want to* is something that *should* trip a lot of people's thinking into "not ok" and I guess I would expect people to equate "not ok" with "something I of course would never do."

[azurelunatic]

DW has an additional level of anonymity, which obscures results from even the person who posted the poll.

[pne]

I wondered the same.

[sophie]

That's a bit of a misnomer. In reality the details results are still visible to the creator of the poll unless the poll itself is marked anonymous, which would result in the line 'This poll is anonymous' being placed in between the poll title and the line showing the poll settings. So no, this poll isn't anonymous, but only Azz will be able to see who answers with what.

I've just submitted a suggestion for changing the text that displays, because "None" isn't quite truthful.

[amberfox]

That seems quite reasonable to me.

[amberfox]

Gmail offers me the following ad in response to the comment notification for this:


How to Catch a Man - CatchHimAndKeepHim.com - 10 Dangerous Mistakes Women Make That Ruin The Perfect Relationship


I can only assume it somehow came up with this off of the subject of the post?

[azurelunatic]

Yes.

[vass]

I would be very interested in another question - gender: male/female/other/none. Unfortunately, with LJ/DW anonymous polls I don't think there's a way to break down which anonymous respondent answered which questions, but it'd still be interesting.

[faithofone]

If we're adding a gender question, it should be fill in the blank. "Othering" a bunch of people who are already marginalized by society sucks the big one. On this particular poll, Azz can see who voted what, it's just that we can't.

[leora]

Well, it is only a minority of people who did say yes in the official study. But it was a large enough percentage to still be surprising to at least some people. (I have trouble being surprised at the results of psych findings having gotten a degree in psych and having seen too many "surprising" findings. I just have trouble knowing what to expect when I have no data anymore) But the correlations between those who said yes and the other traits about them was useful info. Plus that alcohol or other methods of impairment were much more likely to be used than physical force. Knowledge is useful, even when depressing. It is important to know what actual risks are, so we can better take precautions against them, and spend less effort on the lesser risks, like the dangers posed by random strangers.

[jackandahat]

I would be honestly surprised if any of the "Yes" people answered this truthfully. A former friend was very keen on reposting all the "Men, this is how you stop rape" memes, and essays on rape culture.

Offline, she had no idea what "no" meant coming from other people, and a habit of sexual activity with 13 year olds. But that was different because it was her, and she was a nice middle class girl, and it was "all just fun". And if someone agreed to sleep with you because they woke up with your hand down their pants and you pestered them and got all teary, well obviously that's consent because they said yes.

So I suspect there will be a lot of self-reporting bias here.

[pauamma]

"other" in #1 as in "I'm pretty sure 'no', and definitely not knowingly or deliberately, but I can't rule out altogether that the other party saw (or that outside observers would see) threats in what I considered (and meant as) horseplay but didn't bring it up."

[pne]

Unfortunately, with LJ/DW anonymous polls I don't think there's a way to break down which anonymous respondent answered which questions

I think there is - with this kind (which is also possible on LJ), Azz can see who voted for what anyway, but even with the "real" anonymous ones on DW, you can correlate who voted for what since it's really pseudonymous: people get called "person #1" or something like that, so you can tell whether, say, person #45 who said they were female voted this way or that on any other question.