[156] in Discussion of MIT-community interests
Re: Rape@MIT
daemon@ATHENA.MIT.EDU (Steven R. L. Millman)
Sat Apr 21 17:32:59 2001
Message-Id: <4.3.2.7.2.20010421170803.01b87698@hesiod>
Date: Sat, 21 Apr 2001 17:32:49 -0400
To: Nnennia Ejebe <nnennia@MIT.EDU>, mit-talk@MIT.EDU
From: "Steven R. L. Millman" <millman@MIT.EDU>
In-Reply-To: <200104212100.RAA18571@melbourne-city-street.mit.edu>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
The MIT Campus Police, as are all campus police, are required by law to
report their crime statistics. MIT's 1999 numbers are online at:
http://web.mit.edu/cp/www/anrep99/crime.html
It looks like there were 4 cases of forcible sex in the 98-99 academic
year. Assume that no-one here is assaulted like that twice (not
necessarily a good assumption) and assume that 4 is about average. There
are approximately 400 women per class (37%), which means that in a woman's
four year career at MIT she has a probability of being raped of
(1-1596/1600^4) about 1%. This would indicate that one in 100 women at MIT
is the expected number to be the victim of assault involving forcible sex
at MIT during their MIT career. This would not include the time they are
not at MIT, and because of under-reporting these numbers are definitely
lower than actual incidence.
They are not individually reported in the campus papers because that would
be brutal for the victim. Federal law requires confidentiality from the
CP's and the university. The annual crime stats are published on the web
and regularly reported by both the Tech and Tech Talk.
As for your last point, I'm a GRT and I make sure to talk to my students
about rape, especially date rape drugs. I don't know why it hasn't come to
you.
Anyway, hope this helps.
Steven Millman
GRT, Next House
At 04:59 PM 4/21/2001 -0400, you wrote:
>Hey all,
>You know it's time for a new topic when it's hard to figure out what
>people are arguing about.
>
>Anyway, so I was wondering what people think about the
>possiblity/probability that rape occurs on our campus.
>I've heard this statistic over and over: 1 in 4 college age women are
>raped. Assuming that MIT is 10x better than the rest of the population
>(and we know we are) let's make it 1 in 40. Assuming we have 4000
>undergrads, wouldn't that mean that 100 undergrads would be victims of
>rape at MIT!?! Just 1 is a horrible thing, but 100 is ridiculous. How
>come nothing is ever reported in the newspaper? Do the campus police have
>statistics? and why are those not released to the MIT
>community? Considering how vocal the admin. is about alcohol, why I
>haven't I ever heard anything (I'm a freshmen) so far about rape?
>
>I guess people who have been here longer would have some answers for me.
>
>thanks,
>Nnennia
>
>-------------------------------
>At 04:19 PM 4/21/01 -0400, Sourav K. Mandal wrote:
> >
> >"Chwanhai H Hsiung <hermyt@MIT.EDU>" wrote:
> >
> >> 1) How do you know what that person's <whom you are referring to>
> motive is?
> >
> >Ms. Smith argues for egalitarianism at any cost, and thus is clearly
> >employing envy as her ethical principle. I would ask Ms. Smith if she
> >agrees or disagrees with the following statement: "From each according
> >to his ability, to each according to his need."
> >
> >> 2) When did being wealthy become inherently "good"?
> >
> >In a laissez-faire system, wealth is created, not redistributed; in a
> >mixed-economy system with a strong rule of law (i.e. the US), the same
> >holds except for certain powerful special interests (e.g., retirees,
> >the farm lobby) and government bureaucrats. Hence, anyone who creates
> >wealth, for one's self and one's creditors/investors, is doing so by
> >providing a service that people are willing to pay for. Thus, wealth
> >is born of achievement, and is a Good Thing (tm).
> >
> >> So is asking people to be courteous and nice to other people just as
> improper
> >> as paying taxes? [...]
> >
> >It's wrong to make people "act nice," but it's not improper to prevent
> >harm, committed via thievery, violence, or fraud.
> >
> >> [...] I'm essentially advocating stealing time and brainspace fr
> >> om "innocent" people, which, as the maxim goes, is at least as
> valuable as co
> >> ld hard cash.
> >
> >Um, what do you mean? By posting this message? People can choose to
> >not read, or not respond if they do. As far as I know, the IRS gets
> >displeased if you politely decline to pay your taxes.
> >
> >> Please, do not be so vehement about someone's faults and then commit
> them you
> >> rself. <I know, we're all fallible, but do try to keep it to a
> minimum.>
> >
> >It's justifiable to denounce someone for faults that are real, though
> >such denunciation might be counterproductive in the context of a
> >multi-party discussion.
> >
> >
> >Regards,
> >
> >Sourav
