Outrage Over "SAPAC: Sex, Lies, and Statistics"

We received numerous responses to Jacob Oslick's article "SAPAC: Sex, Lies, and Statistics," which appeared in our October 28, 1998 issue. Due to the volume of letters we are unable to print them all here, but we will post them on our website. The following letter was presented at a Review staff meeting by a group of approximately 20 people, and is indicative of the tenor of the majority of the responses. - Ed.

To the Editor:

We would like to address some of the errors and inaccuracies stated by Jacob Oslick in his article entitled "SAPAC: Sex, Lies, and Statistics." (October 2, 1998)

From the beginning of the article, Oslick demonstrates his ignorance on the subject of violenceagainst women by continually confusing and distorting the differences between different forms of sexual assault. To begin with, the definition of sexual assault that SAPAC uses encompasses all forms of unwanted sexual contact, whereas Koss's study included only rape and attempted rape.

Oslick criticizes SAPAC's inclusion of "unwelcome or forcible fondling" into their definition of sexual assault. He feels that this inclusion fails to distinguish "actual rape" from "improper petting." However, Michigan Criminal Sexual Conduct Laws clearly distinguish the two as first (or third) degree criminal sexual conduct and fourth degree criminal sexual conduct. Therefore, Oslick's criticism is not only applicable to SAPAC, but to the state of Michigan and the majority of other states in the U.S. as well.

Another glaring error made by Oslick is his uneducated portrayal of Professor Mary Koss's well-known study, which is respected not only in feminist circles but in academia as well. Oslick distorts Koss's famous "1 out of 4" statistic by suggesting that all of these assaults occurred during the average of four years that a women is enrolled in undergraduate studies. Koss's actual findings demonstrate that 1 out of 4 college women has experienced rape or attempted rape. This study in no way represents the reality of sexual assualt during college years alon, but represents a culmination of women's lives up to these formative years.

Next, Oslick states that "73% of the women [Koss] identified as 'victims' did not 'characterize their sexual encounters that way when asked directly.'" However, this reflects a widespread confusion concerning the legal definition of rape. Though the women did not define their experience as rape in legal terms, the events they reported did meet the legal defintion of rape. Many women were not aware of the fact that violence committed by an intimate partner would meet the legal definition of rape. Professor Koss studied the prevalence of rape in colleges and not feelings of victimization.

Oslick continues on a path of victim-blaming by criticizing the women in Koss's study for continuing to "engage in intercourse with their 'attacker,' after the 'assault' occurred." This criticism fails to recognize the many reasons a woman in a sexually intimate relationship would continue to stay with her abusive partner, including self-blame, confusion, further abuse, and desires of women to make relationships work. The fact that intercourse (with consensus or not) occurs after a rape does not mean that the initial assault did not occur.

Oslick views "rape, sexual assault, and domestic violence ... as isolated, rare incidents" and does not recognize the gravity of sexualized violence. By sarcastically stating that SAPAC seeks "to paint a picture of countless hordes of young women falling victim to patriarchal suppression," Oslick ingnores the recurring statistics cited by organizations and associations across America that illustrates the prevalence of sexualized violence. A National Crime Victimization SUrvey reports that 469 rapes occurred on a daily basis in 1991. Between 1995 and 1996, over 670,000 women experienced rape, attempted rape, or sexual assault, according to a 1997 U.S. Department of Justice statistic.

Oslick also labels domestic violence as a "greatly inflated statistic," when in actuality, 3 to 4 million women are beaten by their partners each year (according to former Surgeon General Koop). UNIFEM, a U.N. non-governmental agency, estimates that 10-14% of all married women in the U.S. have been raped by their husbands. These widespread statistics demonstrate the seriousness of domestic violence and illustrate the great numbers of women who are affected by domestic violence. To call such statistics "inflated" disregards the hundreds of thousands of women beaten, burned, strangled, humiliated, raped, and murdered each year. Oslick's skeptical criticism of SAPAC's estimate that "1 out of 6 rapes are reported to the police" demonstrates his lack of knowledge concerning the reasons women do not report sexualized violence to the police. Out of the 683,000 women over 18 years old who experienced rape in 1990, 84% did not report the event to the police, according to the National Victim Center in 1992. Statistics such as this one remain consistent on college campuses and in cities through out the U.S. For example, only "5 (not the predicted 188) forcible rapes, sodomies, and sexual assaults with an object" that occurred last year on the University of Michigan campus were reported to the University Department of Public Safety. Many reasons exist as to why women do not report sexualized violence. Often, women's lives are threatened and they cannot safely report their assault to the police. Many women do not know the legal definitions of sexual assault; therefore, they do not know that what they experienced is a crime. Some women fear the treatment they will receive by friends and family after they report an assault; others fear they will not be believed. Many women who report assaults to the police experience victim blaming; others do not have the resources to prosecute their perpetrator or seek legal guidance. These are only a few of the reasons that approximately less than one in three rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement agencies in 1996 (U.S. Department of Justice, 1997).

We believe that Jacob Oslick's treatment of sexual assault and SAPAC's mission is uneducated, unresearched, and demonstrates a paucity of knowledge in the arena of sexualized violence against women. Sexualized violence is a serious, pervasive problem in our society, and unless people start to realize its prevalence and effects, we cannot begin to deal with the problem.

Mr. Oslick responds:

Dear Concerned Individuals,

First, you claim that I demonstrated my "ignorance" by distorting the differences between the various forms of sexual assault. In fact, in my article I clearly state that "Unlike Koss, who only considered acts of penetration as 'sexual assault,' SAPAC also includes unwelcome or forcible fondling under their umbrella definition." In reality it is SAPAC that distorts the definition by blurring the distinction. Unlike the Michigan Criminal Sexual Code, SAPAC does not distinguish between different degrees of sexual assault in all its literature (though it does in some). Rather, it labels everything under one "umbrella definition."

Next, you call my critique of Prof. Koss's study as "uneducated." However, the conclusions she reached do not correlate with other statistics your group cited (both in your letter, and orally at our meeting). For example, even taking at face value your stated claim that 61% of the assaults occurred before college (and I hold the constitutional right to skepticism, especially considering the veracity of these statistics), the picture does not alter significantly. Using a base figure of 11 (DPS reported sexual assaults over the past two years, two years being the average length of time a college woman has been in college), then multiplying by 6 (since, as you claim, only 1 out of 6 women reports sexual assault), you reach a total of 66. Then, dividing by .39 (the alleged percentage of rapes that occur in college), the total jumps to 170. Although this figure is significant, it is ridiculously below the expected figure of 3000 (1 out of 4 University women). Since you insist the statistics remain "consistent on college campuses and in cities throughout the U.S.," I think it is fair to assume that Michigan is not an island of safety for women. Thus, these figures show the general amount of exaggeration in Koss's study.

Furthermore, you state that my skepticism about the 1 in 6 reported figure demonstrates my "lack of knowledge" about sexual assault. However, in the same letter you cite a different, more recent figure of 1 out of 3. Since you yourselves list two separate statistics (the other twice as high than 1 in 6), I feel this skepticism is not only justified, but consistent with a non-partisan look at the issue. On the other hand, your seeming refusal to question any statistics (even those accumulated by highly partisan organizations), suggests where the true "lack of knowledge" exists.

In the same regard, you criticize my comment that domestic violence statistics are greatly inflated. However, sexual assault, not domestic violence, was the focus of my article, and I never specified which statistics I felt were inflated. For the record, one such false statistic is the claim by the National Coalition Against Domestic Violence (a partisan organization similar to Ms., which sponsored Koss's study) that 1/3 of married women are beaten each year. As you yourselves can see, this number is far above the 4 million women you cite. Indeed, this very claim substantiates my argument that feminist, partisan organizations tend to grossly inflate statistics, rather then providing objective information.

Lastly, you misunderstand my reasoning for pointing out the frequency of Koss's alleged "victims" continuing to engage in sexual activity with their "attacker." I was not continuing on "a path of victim blaming." No where in the article do I blame women for the atrocities committed against them by sexual predators. Indeed, I labeled each of these instances a "tragedy." On the other hand, your attack bears remarkable resemblance to my claim that one goal of inflated statistics is to perpetuate an "extreme feminist stereotype of men as Neanderthal beasts." In reality, I cited these figures to suggest that not all of Koss's reports were accurate. And yes, Neanderthal as it may seem, I suspect that the great majority of women do not remain sexually active with their rapists.

In reality, the true individuals displaying a "lack of knowledge" are you, the "Concerned Individuals." Rather then critically examining these propagandish statistics, you accept them as dogma - despite the glaring internal contradictions in your own letter (1 in 6, or 1 in 3 etc.), and when you actually do the math. Your repeated attacks on me as "uneducated" amount to an Orwellian twist on the truth - I have not been re-educated by extreme feminists armed with false figures. My central claim that SAPAC represents the University's version of the "Ministry of Truth and Love" remains not only intact after your letter, but strengthened by your criticism. - JO

This article was published in the 18 November 1998 edition of The Michigan Review (Volume 17, Number 4).
For questions or comments, see the Contact Information page.