CDC: Youth Risk Behavior Surveillance

Apart from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Surveys (NISVS) CDC also performs at regular intervals a survey among high school students called “Youth Risk Behaviour Surveillance” and has done so since the 1990s.

 

In 2001 they added the question

Have you ever been physically forced to have sexual intercourse when you did not want to?

to the survey.

 

Below is a chart showing the results of that questions since 2001 and up to the latest available data which is from 2015:

Continue reading

Advertisements

First Glimpse of NISVS 2012 Results

I have written quite a few posts about the NISVS 2010 and NISVS 2011 reports which found staggering number for male victimization of sexual violence – in particular in the “made to penetrate” category which for inexplicable reasons CDC buried by not categorizing it as rape.

 

CDC have recently published a fact sheet about sexual victimization among boys and girls under 18. The data is stated that is from the NISVS 2012 and are the first indication I’ve seen that the CDC continued with the NISVS after the one surveyed in 2011 (results were published in 2014).

 

The Fact Sheet is titled “Sexual Violence in Youth – Findings from the 2012 National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey“.

 

The Fact Sheet listed a table containing key findings from the NISVS 2012:

NISVS 2012 Key Findings

 

Sex Exchange More Common Among Boys

An earlier post of mine titled “And Boys Too…” looked at the prevalence of teen prostitution among boys in different countries. I noted that to some extent there are more teen aged male prostitutes than teen aged female prostitutes based on a handful of studies.

Here is another US study using a nationally representative sample of adolescents and young adults which found that more males reported exchanging sex than females.

Ulloa, E.; Salazar, M.; & Monjaras, L. (2016). Prevalence and Correlates of Sex Exchange Among a Nationally Representative Sample of Adolescents and Young Adults. Journal of Child Sexual Abuse, 25(5), 524-537.

It used data from The National Longitudinal Study of Adolescent to Adult Health.

 

 

CDC Uniform Definitions Of Sexual Violence And Male Victims

I have written about the discrepancy between the categories and definitions used by the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey (NISVS) and the uniform definitions the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) had published at that time (UD2009) which was a minor revision of the uniform definitions published in 2002 (UD2002).

I recently became aware that last December the CDC have published a new version of the document, “Sexual Violence Surveillance: Uniform Definitions and Recommended Data Elements” (UD2014), on their website. A panel of 11 experts which received comments from seven leaders in the field wrote this document. The panel started its work in October 2010 with this stated agenda:

The key issues discussed and considered by the in-person expert panel that were directly relevant to the SV definitions document were the following: 1) how and if to include unwanted non-physically pressured sex, 2) how and if to include sexual harassment, 3) whether or not to expand the meaning of “completed sex act” to identify who penetrates whom, and 4) how and if to update the Recommended Data Elements.

Continue reading

Pilot White House Mandated Campus Climate Survey Did End Up Ignoring Male Victims

Almost a year ago I wrote a post about the correspondence I had with the pilot survey project which the White House Task Force to Protect Students From Sexual Assault tasked Rutgers University to do. I expressed my concern with the methodology suggested by the White House Task Force to Protect Students From Sexual Assault in their recommendations published in April 2014.

My impression from the email exchange I had with the project team leader at Rutgers University were that they took my concerns about male victims not being measured by some of the recommended methodologies seriously and they assured me that they would be using gender neutral questions.They also said they would include my concerns in the pilot project’s feedback to the White House and the Office on Violence against Women.

The 2nd of September Rutgers University published a report with the findings from their Campus Climate survey. Which is an opportunity for me to examine to what extent my concerns were considered.

Continue reading

White House Mandated Campus Climate Surveys Likely To Ignore Male Victims

Update: Rutgers University has confirmed that they will not be using the SES.

This post has also been published on Feminist Critics.

 

After I wrote this post I sent a mail to the leader of the pilot survey project at Rutgers University expressing my concern for the recommendation of SES as a possible instrument and explained how SES exclude a subset of male victims of rape. I also outlined Mary P Koss’ stance that it’s not appropriate to call it rape if a man is made to penetrate a woman without his consent.

I got a reply within the same day stating that the pilot project at Rutgers would not use the SES, but rather the questionnaire used by CSA – The Campus Sexual Assault (CSA) study by Krebs, Lindquist, Warner, Fisher and Martin.
She went on to write that The Rutgers’ pilot survey will use the following language: “Sexual assault” and “sexual violence” refer to a range of behaviors that are unwanted by the recipient and include remarks about physical appearance, persistent sexual advances that are undesired by the recipient, threats of force to get someone to engage in sexual behavior, as well as unwanted touching and unwanted oral, anal or vaginal penetration or attempted penetration. These behaviors could be initiated by someone known or unknown to the recipient, including someone they are in a relationship with.

She stated that:

While we do not distinguish between being made to penetrate someone versus being penetrated against one’s wishes, these are both included in the broader definition we use.

I wrote back that even though I was relieved they weren’t going to use Koss’ SES I feared that the stereotype of the penetrator being the perpetrator and the one being penetrated being the victim might skew their results.

She wrote back again thanking me for the input, saying that my concerns were appreciated and valid. She also asked my permission to include my messages in their feedback about the pilot study to the White house and the Office on Violence against Women (OVW). I gave permission to do so.

My impression is that she took my comments and criticism very seriously.

When time permits I’ll put up a post with screenshots of the mails.

My original post follows below:

 

Recently someone on my feed retweeted a reference to a study by Jennifer Freyd on sexual violence at the University of Oregon. I decided to spend some time looking into it and what I found deeply disturbed me.

I’ll start from the beginning:

Continue reading

NISVS 2011 Released – Increased Male Victimization And Rape Is Still Not Rape

This post has also been published on Feminist Critics.

 

On Friday 5th of September CDC released a report which summarizes data from the second year of data collection from the National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey. They’ve also released a fact sheet for the NISVS 2011 data. The NISVS 2010 Report, which I’ve written several blog posts about, reported on data collected during 2010 while this one reports on data collected in 2011.

Continue reading