Perceptions Of Rape And Sexual Assault Sociology Essay

Through the span of this essay Irina Anderson¿½s research into rape understanding will be critically analysed. This essay will firstly summarise the research and then proceed through each hypothesis, the strategy used and the ideas submit within the discussion will be evaluated due to their respective talents and weaknesses. Furthermore there will be a section commenting on the area of this research within rape research most importantly. A number of the problems associated with results of this research and the conclusions drawn from it'll be viewed also. Finally ideas on ways to overcome these problems will also be looked into. As this examination takes place within the framework of Social Mindset Andersons research will thus be looked at through the lens of theories relating to attitudes. This was first submit by Allport who defined behaviour as ¿½A mental and neural express of readiness, organised through experience, exerting a directive or active influence after the individual¿½s response to all or any objects and situations with which it is related¿½ (Allport, 1935 p. 810). due to the gendered aspect of rape understanding this research is a lot needed in building a frame benefit how rape is seen by the public. The abstract is clear and to the idea and succinctly condenses the research. The three hypothesises under investigation are what's the current understanding of woman rape, whether this notion does apply to male rape or is there elements of ethnic lag in male rape. Despite previous research it was discovered that these hypothesises were demonstrated wrong through the study

During the intro these foundation of the hypothesises under inspection are laid. It had been found that earlier research acquired shown that feminine rape was most commonly seen ¿½stranger rape¿½. The Stranger rape stereotype (SRS) is a script which constructs rape as occurring between two different people who do not know one another, the act usually happens during the night with the ¿½battling sufferer subdued¿½, etc. However studies show that contrary to this scenario almost all feminine rapes 78-84% (Gavey 2005, Koss 1988) are devoted by males known to the sufferer this disparity between established statistics and public perceptions is area of the basis of this study. It is argues that changes in rape perception, brought on by demystifying of rape misconceptions by the marketing, the break down of gender roles and reports which claim that a broader classification of rape is being used have mixed to donate to the complete rejection of the original SRS paradigm into that of acquaintance rape. Though Gavey p 17-49 has reviewed the move away from traditional stranger rape paradigm, especially from the 1970¿½s onward, an entire reversal of general public thinking does not seem to be to be completely reinforced. However as members within this review were asked to ¿½generate their own lists of information¿½ it was expected an response to this question would be found through the course of Andersons research.

One of the main points that may be attracted from the benefits is what appear to be a insufficient research pursuing on from Kahn¿½s work regarding a concrete parting of and description of public attitudes to the differences between acquaintance rape and seduction (Kahn 2004). The overlap between these terms as reported by Kahn may lead to general misunderstanding and it can be argued that with out a clear differentiation between these conditions present research into the conceptualisation of feminine rape may be hampered. In order to address these questions, this current research is vital is analysing what a female rape will be conceptualised as.

The results pertaining to the first hypothesis are analysed within the dialogue section, which is the well organised and reasonable it starts by addressing the first findings regarding the first hypothesis was immediately contradicted by the results of the experiment. It is well argued that a possible reason behind this opposition was anticipated in part to the problems ¿½blame attribution¿½ where by participants described situations in which the victim would be less inclined to ¿½request societal blame¿½. From this analysis the issue of societal blame is apparently highly salient in rape notion. Moreover in descriptions of the rape Anderson asserts that respondents appear to convey scenarios in which no level of blame may be mounted on the victim and suggests that further research should concentrate on whether individuals are explaining what they see as the truth of typical rapes or if other factors, specifically blame attribution play a part in the results. Research unscrambling this ambiguity would do much to help expand the analysis of public rape understanding.

The second objective of Anderson¿½s research is to ascertain whether or not male rape is seen across the same parameters as time frame/acquaintance rape in females. It is stated that scheduled to a lack of data concerning man rape cause by low article rates and the propagation of rape common myths and misconceptions that the research into the general population perception of guy rape has in not been given the interest which it deserves. From the information gathered in past in past studies (Donnelly and Kenyon 1996) it has been hypothesised that if the current opinion of female rape is characterised within the guidelines of acquaintance/day rape and that male rape is additionally seen within the old SRS model. The next area of the discussion directly handles the results relating to this hypothesis. From your analysis undertaken feminine rape may still be generally seen along the lines of a ¿½stranger- acquaintance rape continuum¿½. However the results show that male rape is looked at along completely dissimilar lines to feminine rape. From these findings Anderson argues that ¿½men rape conception may be characterised by (a) erroneous and mythical conception¿½. These other factors include explanations of the action of rape, the comparative durability of the perpetrator and sufferer, sexual orientation and the drive of the rape being erotic urges [alternatively than electricity related]. The fact that a few of the factors related to male rape include homosexuality and that homophobic belief

The hypothesis of the ¿½social lag¿½ of male rape was however not supported during the course of the study. Finding show that male rape does not lag behind female rape, alternatively ¿½other¿½ factors not found the SRS/AR models were drawn upon when conceptualising male rape. These ¿½other¿½ factors constitute a fourth hypothesis in the technique section weren't earlier mentioned within the benefits or hypothesis synopsis. The failure to add this fourth hypothesis recently, which directly addresses the ¿½other¿½ factors associated with male rape is apparently an oversight. However though it is very useful in helping to seem sensible of the info as a whole, the overdue formulation, or at least labelling of this as a hypothesis, subverts the initial goals of the test and message or calls into question the validity of the info coded in this section. The inclusion of this section also further widens the scope of this limited study. Taking into consideration the limited data which might be collected from such a little (119 people) and highly privileged test of the population. In light of the three main interconnected hypothesises the extension to a fourth hypothesis principally worried about factors initially outside the experiments design contributes to a genuine weakening of the review. Though this data is well coded and analysed, there can be no doubt that section places strain upon the technique portion of this study as a whole.

The third intention of the current research is to analyse the distinctions of response between male and female respondents. All earlier studies which consider male and feminine attitudes to rape show a solid divergence between behaviour across the gender separate. This it is argued is unsurprising due firstly the actual fact that men generally have less understanding of or contact with rape, and secondly because of the fact that ¿½historically been the victims of assault while men have been the perpetrators¿½. In contract with this it is exhibited that men more regularly concur than disagree with rape misconceptions, empathise less and ¿½maintain less tolerant attitudes towards victims (Jiminez & Abreu, 2003) Furthermore Andersons past research has discovered that men own more homophobic behaviour that women in regards to male rape. That is supported solidly by past research, which in summery claims that as men experience rape less which as the issue of rape is less prominent within the male awareness. Men will extrapolate their knowledge of female rape, to a men scenario across the SRS paradigm.

In drawing out the reason why for the predominance of factors such as homosexuality and homophobia associated with men but not feminine rape Anderson places forwards several reasons as to why this can be the case, the first is that participants may simply be ¿½expressing their disgust at this take action¿½ (Davies, 2002). Secondly use homophobic terms as a means of distancing the participants from the sufferer so at to keep their ¿½masculinity intact¿½ and also remove the probability that they (the guy members ) could themselves be raped. This is an extremely interesting point which is well argued and is also a convincing research of the data presented. The suggestion given for even more research investigating the bond between sexuality and homophobia with regards to conceptualizations of male rape and the blame related to victims is well founded and may go a way in explaining why these factors have gained such prominence in this research.

Through span of critically analysing the existing research many issues of importance have become apparent. Firstly any research which furthers the field of rape conception is of huge importance. It is also of paramount importance to educating the public at large about the predominant developments of rape within population. With regard this article under review some very important questions have been lifted by this research. The fact that all but one of hypothesis has been proven false may be observed partly as a cause for alarm. This is particularly evident in the event that feminine rape belief has seemed to have lost its ethnic lead over supposed paradigms of male rape. This calls for a reassessment of assumptions that female rape is normally seen within the AR platform. Secondly the fact that male rape is not seen either as SRS or AR and is also seen in often homophobic terms may be interpreted in a different way than to Andersons theory that homophobia is a kind of distancing for male participants, it might be interpreted as information that homophobia is much more visible in world than previously assumed. The difference between male and feminine respondents is not clearly resolved either, it seems from prior research that more than ever there is currently a pressing need to teach males within modern culture about the many aspects of rape. From analysing this research it seems that very little was affirmed or disproved about rape behaviour and perceptions, this research has in turn lifted more questions than it right answers. In conducting future research it would be advisable to approach one hypothesis at a time, using a much bigger sample of the population. Furthermore a more careful use of wording of research questions could also gain future studies, for example the question what exactly are the predominant circumstances of a male/female rape may address the hypothesis more evidently than the use of the phrase ¿½typical¿½. This leads us to ask further questions about the difficult nature of the type of research.

Anderson¿½s current research acknowledges some of the shortcomings of the present study like the fact that the study participants used for the study were from a student population, not surprisingly acknowledgement it might be naive to generalise these findings because of the particularities associated with a student sample to the population at large. A few of the key problems associated with by using a student population because of this type of are that as recognized by the study that rape may be a concern generally presented in the student consciousness. Subsequently the predominantly early age participants, mean get older 21. 2, could quite possibly play a big part in how rape is conceptualised. That is especially important due to the fact the age group of these students claim that they are raised within the AR construction. A larger research would show the way the population most importantly conceptualise rape. It can be argued that maybe even previously un-theorised principles of rape may be found because of this of such a study. It could also be of great interest to investigate what the existing perceptions of marital/partner rape is.

Another important factor which ¿½may have influenced findings¿½ is that up to 34% of the participant were from ethnic minorities. Anderson argues that this factor may have improved the results of the analysis. It could however be argued that the addition of cultural minorities may in truth give the present study an increased amount of validity and allow this research to be generalised. Regardless of the supposed ¿½less tolerant perceptions of rape¿½ within minority communities (Nagel, 2005), the hypothesised knowledgeable attitudes of the college student population seem to be unfounded. This finding adds to the overall bafflement of the results shown. At present it is impossible to state whether the addition of these minorities have lead to a substantial change in the findings of the survey. Further studies such as Nagel¿½s research should be suggested. This work should focus on the questions of contest, ethnicity and class should be handled as a means of aiding the knowledge of rape perceptions in the general public at large.

In conclusion the existing body of research into rape notion is clearly missing. The conclusions of some earlier research which are not supported by this analysis are a serious problem which must in credited course be tackled. Furthermore Andersons unsupported hypothesises clearly show the necessity for further and even more directed research in to the area of open public rape perceptions. Some interesting items were brought up which also require further research, most importantly the actual fact that female rape perception continues to be categorised such as SRS rather than AR. In addition to this the data produced about the ¿½other¿½ factors associated with man rape also warrant exploration. Anderson¿½s recommendation that further studies concentrating on blame attribution is a rational and well reasoned course of action and is also highly advisable. In summery former and present research has shown spaces in the understanding of how the public view rape scripts. This research has done much to point out this problem. It can only be hoped that further research and general population education can result in an increased awareness and understanding on the topic of rape.

Also We Can Offer!

Other services that we offer

If you don’t see the necessary subject, paper type, or topic in our list of available services and examples, don’t worry! We have a number of other academic disciplines to suit the needs of anyone who visits this website looking for help.

How to ...

We made your life easier with putting together a big number of articles and guidelines on how to plan and write different types of assignments (Essay, Research Paper, Dissertation etc)