Saturday, 5 April 2014

CDC admits it uses Feminist definitions to impose sexism on it's services.

–]oneiorosgrip 2 points ago


In February of 2013 I sent a Freedom of Information act request to the CDC asking for the raw numbers from 2010 for the various areas of intimate partner and sexual violence, with a specific set of questions.


The CDC took almost a year to reply, sent me a PDF file with copy/paste errors in it that looks very much like it was thrown together at the last minute, and insisted on trying to tell me that it was useless before releasing it to me. Their explanation for why it was supposedly useless didn't address the interest I had in it.


In addition to the errors, there were issues with the information itself. There are areas in which the text makes the claim "The numbers of respondents reporting victimization in other categories not described above were too small to produce a reliable estimate and therefore were not included in the report" about types of victimization for which hundreds were listed reporting in response to other questions.

It's evident that there *were * enough respondents in at least some of those categories, and the CDC or the researchers themselves simply dodged the questions because they did not want to answer them.


It was in part because of that evasiveness that during the conference call, I point blank asked them why they refuse to call forced coitus rape when the victim is male if they're aware that it's rape when the victim is female.

The researcher on the phone literally could not answer the question - she stumbled over it for a few seconds before falling back on "because the experts said so." There was no actual reasoning - just, "because we said so."


We saw the "reasoning" behind Koss's decision to exclude female-on-male rape from the definition of rape. That is where the "expert" definition comes from.

What I got from them was an admission that they've allowed feminists to write sexism into their policy on sexual violence. It didn't even seem to bother them that much to admit it.

source

No comments:

Post a Comment

Please try to avoid logical fallacies!