Has one in every ten women really been raped?
Another online survey, this time from Mumsnet, concludes that one woman in ten has been raped, and over a third have been sexually assaulted. The best data we have, from the British Crime Survey, suggests this is an overestimate.
The latest bulletin on Homicides, Firearm Offences and Intimate Violence, published in January, indicates (Table 3.01) that 3.7 per cent of women report having been raped since the age of 16 (4.5 per cent if attempted rape is included), and 18.6 per cent report having experienced any form of sexual assault – around half the proportions reported by Mumsnet.
The BCS figures come from a properly-chosen sample of more than 6,000 women. The Mumsnet results come from “write-in” responses on its website from 1,609 women.
There are differences in coverage: Mumsnet included in its responses all rapes and assaults over a lifetime, while the BCS counts only those occurring over the age of 16. That could account for some of the difference, but a more likely explanation is that the Mumsnet respondents are not a representative sample, being overweighted by those who have suffered abuse.
The Mumsnet survey is part of a campaign called We Believe You. I certainly don’t disbelieve Mumsnet’s respondents, as it’s unlikely they are making it up. But I don’t believe that any self-selected survey of this sort provides a basis for reaching any conclusion at all.
Among those who said they had been raped or sexually assaulted in the Mumsnet survey, only 9 per cent said that they had reported the assault to the police, against 29 per cent of women in the BCS survey who said that they had reported partner abuse to the police in the past year. Yet a majority of the Mumsnet respondents (59 per cent) also believe that the police are “quite” or “very” sympathetic to women who report rape. So why not report it?
The survey was widely but not universally covered – The Times and The Guardian did not report it, but The Independent, The Daily Telegraph and The Sun did. The BBC reported it at length, but without challenging the Mumsnet figures. Doesn't the BBC College of Journalism include a course on statistical scepticism?
Casting doubt on the Mumsnet claims does not imply any lack of sympathy for victims, or a failure to accept the scale of the problem – just a desire to anchor policy on the best evidence available, which this isn’t.
Henry (not verified) wrote,
Mon, 12/03/2012 - 19:41
The BBC news people quite often tend to promote feminist view. It needs to be understood that this is a political view, as much as taking sides on the EU, the middle-east, or in UK elections would be.
I think this also led to misreporting on deaths from Domestic violence - which was picked up by their own show "More or less" a few years ago. (these figures had been quite widely reported previously to appearing on the BBC news)
The BBC supposedly has a commitment to impartiality. It often fails in this but even when it is trying to live up to it there are some striking bits of naievity
But your own words here show how certain one is to be accused of anything from lack of sympathy to outright misogyny for daring to question such claims.
Anonymous (not verified) wrote,
Tue, 13/03/2012 - 04:17
I think the figures are not valid without the under 16 included. Incest is far more common that will ever be reported - many victims believed it was normal and okay until they move away from home.
Under 16 is likely the primary target for rapists, because most of them have childhood traumas so they relate to children as targets. More facts please!!
Also, the bit about "feeling comfortable reporting rape to police", I guess, if your survey says so - oh wait!! that was the one part of Mumsnet you DID take seriously.
When you look at the low rates of conviction for rape, and the reported rapes that were never investigated, well I think we have some work to do to getting Straight Statistics on it.
I heard that 50% of women are sexually assaulted, over lifetime... although "I am not a survey" myself, half the women I know tell me they were sexually assaulted.
PS - see? some people really do read your website!! I like it overall...
Anonymous (not verified) wrote,
Tue, 13/03/2012 - 12:10
I would say that statistics on the rape and sexual assault will never be anything other than an estimate.
My opinion would be that the figures would probably be much higher than that of mumsnet. There are so many complex reasons why women (and men) will not report these crimes to police:
1. In my opinion, there is a huge lack of faith in the courts as an appropriate course of justice for this type of crime, which is typically one word against another's. Outfit, attitudes, drunkiness and other irrelevant facts are routinely scrutinised up as some kind of 'they brought it on themselves' defence in courts. Not many people having already gone through the humilation of a sexual assault wants to go through this kind of public judgment. This isn't to say that I disagree that the accused has a right to present a defence, of course. It is just that the current set-up I would argue is inappropriate and discourages anyone from reporting a rape/sexual assault. In addition, the statistics as to the number of guilty outcomes to rape cases in court have been reported in the media as being very low.
2. Blame. Very often sexual assaults are a confused area - the rapist was a partner, family member or well-known to the victim. The actual attack can lead people to feel uncertain as to whether it was actually a 'clear-cut rape' (eg I was scared so I didn't fight back or say no, I froze), and it can take many years to realise that they weren't to blame, by which time it is too late to report it. The ramifications of going to the police in these cases are the possibility of loss of/judgment from friends and family, which is a lot to bear having already gone through a rape/sexual assault.
I could go on.
I think people will be more honest to an anonymous internet poll than they ever would for official statistics, and I certainly don't think the British Crime Statistics can be used at all as a measure of this kind of crime unfortunately for the very reasons above - if it isn't reported, then the stats aren't collected. But how can we obtain accurate stats on unreported rape and sexual assault?
There needs to be another solution for gathering statistics (and indeed tackling this crime itself), but I'm uncertain as to what it could ever be.
Anonymous (not verified) wrote,
Tue, 20/03/2012 - 21:40
The above contributors may not realise but the notion that the accused will be allowed adequate room to mount a robust defence is a pipe dream. The right to a full and effective defence have been gradually removed from all accused of a sexual offence over the past 20 years.
The suggestion that "under 16 is likely the primary target for rapists" is simply not true since the zenith is not reached until the age range of 20 - 30 years olds. The conviction rate for rape is not "low" as my earlier articles here have demonstrated. in fact the conviction rate is around 50% - a heretical fact a decade ago but now accepted by the Stern Report.
The belief that "reported rapes' are/ were never investigated" is hard to square with mandatory police procedures and long standing Home Office Circulars on this subject. What is "low" in terms of rates is the attrition rate but this has nothing to do with actual offences or conviction.
It never ceases to amaze me why the media persists in (misleadingly) conveying outcomes in rape cases as poor.- (RW)