CNN covers James Landrith’s story

CNN ran a piece about James Landrith’s story of rape at the hands of a woman. It is a somewhat balanced treatment of the issue of sexual violence against men. While the article does not discuss all the barriers preventing abused men and boys from coming forward, it does do a decent job of highlighting how social attitudes towards abused men and boys add to the problems they face.

4 thoughts on “CNN covers James Landrith’s story

  1. It’s amazing they are still touting that 1 in 5 women and 1 in 71 men are sexually assaulted. The stat came from a VAWA telephone survey that excluded more men than it interviewed. They never made it past the “screening” process. The study has since been debunked but unfortunately the 1 in 71 seems to have stuck. Feminists seized on the stat in order to prove women need much more money for services and facilities than men.

    I’ve lost faith in the CDC.

  2. revspinnaker: I am not sure if you are talking about the same survey, but the 1 in 5 and 1 in 71 is also findings reported by the NISVS 2010 Report. Do you have any more information about the “screening process”?

    My understanding so far has been that it’s pretty clear the the main problem with the 1 in 5 and 1 in 71 stats as reported by NISVS 2010 is a definitional issue since forcing a man to sexually penetrate someone with his genitals is not defined as rape, but rather as a separate category called “made to penetrate” – which incidentally is effectively hidden by putting it in the much bigger superset – “other sexual violence” which includes “non-contact unwanted sexual experiences”.

    By correctly classifying “made to penetrate” as rape we get a lifetime prevalence for male rape victims somewhere between 4.8% and 6.4% – if we look at the prevalence for the last 12 months we get 1.1% of men were victims of rape in the last 12 months. Incidentally 1.1% of women also reported rape in the last 12 months – leaving us with a 50-50% gender distribution of rape victims in the last 12 months (which in the context of the survey was for the year 2009).

  3. Tamen, yes we are talking about the same study. It was a VAWA funded survey operated through the CDC. The definition of rape was also a point of contention. I’m pretty sure I read about the screening process on a link from the PCAR (Pennsylvania Coalition Against Rape) webpage.

    Had PCAR been doing their job in an non-bigoted manner (i.e. including boys as victims of sexual assault) Sandusky would have been busted decades ago.

  4. James Landrith have done an interview for another newspaper. This time for the University of Alaska-Fairbanks The Sun Star:

    I notice that the Sun Star also quote the “1 in 71 men have been sexually assaulted” stats referring to the CDC. First of all i wonder why they (UAFSS) used the term “sexually assaulted” rather than “rape” – which was the term CDC used in NISVS 2010.

    “Sexually assault” is most cases I’ve seen used as a wider term than “rape”. Canada removed rape (specifying the victim being penetrated) as a legal term and replaced it with “sexual assault” – a term which includes intercourse where the victim is the one being penetrated as well as other sexual violence not normally included in the definition for rape. Hence CNN and UAFSS translating CDC’s narrowly defined term “rape” into “sexual assault” is contributing to further downplaying the number of male victims even as the piece raise awareness of male victims.

    I wonder where that particular misstatement of the 1 in71 men statistics from NISVS 2010 first occurred.

    I suspect it must be somewhat galling for James Landrith who is rightfully adamant about what he experienced was rape to see that the very articles that give him voice doesn’t quite get it and end up so incongruent: writing that James Landrith was raped while in the same article quote statistics which by definition doesn’t include Landrith as a rape victim.

    I want to emphasize that I think that James Landrith put in a courageous and important effort which is much appreciated by me lest anyone thinks this is a criticism of him – it’s not.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s