32% US students would rape

If islam law happen 0% rape

You may be in for a shock.

If there's no laws most people would rape, murder and steal.

Women commit rape too. Would be interesting to see a study on that, as it is pretty much never mentioned.

All of you saying 'oh but people would rob a bank too' please just take a moment to think about the difference between raping a woman and robbing a bank. Just think about that carefully. Are they really comparable acts?

And as for 'people would kill people if there were no consequences too' - most people would want to kill those who are bad people, eg. Robert Mugabe, or those who had done them wrong. I imagine few would be interested in killing random innocents. What did the women do to deserve being raped? Nothing, the man just wanted sex - and apparently at least 27 of them (and in reality far more going by the prevalence of rape across the world) think that this is worth traumatising a woman and potentially ruining the rest of her life for. It's absolutely disgusting. Even 1 positive response is far too many, yet people are whingeing that it's 'only' 27.

Of course you can compare them if you define the context - under English law they are both punishable by a maximum life sentence. I don't disagree that rape is worse on moral grounds, but don't forget we're talking about an artificial situation in this study of no adverse consequences.

But we already know that there exists people who would commit rape, that is blindingly obvious. The point is that this study shows us absolutely nothing and makes strong, unjust claims.

On the contrary, It hints at just how many people may be willing to commit rape. And it goes some way towards dispelling the myth that only creepy strangers rape people, these are normal university students.

You're missing the point, the question implied law was no longer an issue, hence the 'with no consequences', so it doesn't matter what they're usually punishable by.

Morals are therefore everything with this particular question, if there are no laws, it comes down to what you're willing to do - these guys were willing to ruin a woman's life for sex.

You just said there would be no consequence.

On the contrary, It hints at just how many people may be willing to commit rape. And it goes some way towards dispelling the myth that only creepy strangers rape people, these are normal university students.

1) They offered extra-credit to those who would participate in the study. This is coercian and poor scientific practice as it skews the study population, unless you want to be making generalisations about "White, college majors who needed extra credit". This alone would have prevented it from being published in most academic journals, especially any British ones.

Pretty bad study tbh.

1) They offered extra-credit to those who would participate in the study. This is coercian and poor scientific practice as it skews the study population, unless you want to be making generalisations about "White, college majors who needed extra credit". This alone would have prevented it from being published in most academic journals, especially any British ones.

2) They used altered questionaires, based on outdated publications (Almost 30 years old? Come on). These questionaires are not validated as they have only used specific subsets from within them. For example, I would fall into the trap of "holding down women to coerce into sex". However, it was my girlfriend and I knew that she enjoys this. Would you state that "kissing a womans neck to coerce them into sex" is defined as rape? They have essentially tried to skew definitions to make conclusions.

3) I also disagree with the "no consequence" model being used. This is not defined correctly and again can be used to make poor correlations. In a true 'consequence free' world it would not be immoral to rape a woman because she would suffer no consequences herself.

4) Their conclusions don't really make sense (The only one they can really make is that there is an association between intention to rape and intent to use force) and this is shown by their fumbling discussion. They've essentially said, aha you've stated you wouldn't rape somebody but you've said here you'd use force to have sex! Well, good job but this doesn't show anything for the reasons outlined above. If I stated that I'd use any method to coerce a woman into sex, that is not the same as condoning rape.

5) Their sample size is small, probably why there are bugger all confidence intervals published in the data.

It's a reasonably average study because of the flaws in the data collection but the data analysis is pretty spot on, hence it's publication in a low impact, new journal and poor reporting. Hey ho, at least the Tab has linked the original study which should be commended.

Many studies in America are done this way (hence the large amount of studies with first-year university students), and they are well regarded world-wide.

And 0% fun either.

Many studies in America are done this way (hence the large amount of studies with first-year university students), and they are well regarded world-wide.