Top Doc: Akin not far off base in rape comment

[_bcspace]

Not making a judgement about the science but illustrating the rank hypocrisy of the Left:

All decent people, including U.S. Senate candidate Todd Akin, agree that forcible rape is a heinous crime. Almost all would agree that illegitimate (false) accusations of rape occur – there’s the case of the Duke lacrosse players, for example.

All reasonable people, including Todd Akin, agree that pregnancy can result from forcible rape – but there is scientific disagreement on how likely it is.

A 1988 textbook, the second edition of “Human Sex and Sexuality” by Edwin B. Steen and James H. Price, estimates a 2 percent pregnancy rate. A 2012 textbook, “Comprehensive Gynecology,” 6th edition, gives an estimate of between 2 percent and 5 percent and states that “in the experience of most sexual assault centers, the chance of pregnancy occurring is quite low.” Estimates depend on flawed methods, with inevitable biases. An experiment to give an accurate figure is, of course, impossible. And does the estimate really matter to the woman who has been raped? Either she gets pregnant, or she doesn’t.

Is the risk of pregnancy lower with forcible rape, and if so, why? Off the cuff, Todd Akin gave a layman’s restatement of the point made by some pro-life physicians that the female body has some defense mechanisms against pregnancy in cases of rape.

The process of fertilization, implantation and maintenance of pregnancy is an intricate one, highly dependent on hormonal signals. Stress is conceded to make miscarriage more likely by disrupting the hormonal milieu. What could be more stressful than a forcible rape?

The intensity of the media outrage against Akin’s remark shows that this is not a scientific dispute about numbers, or the definition of “really rare.” Medical science is being replaced by political demagoguery about the issue of rape.

Rape clearly involves a forcible penetration of a woman’s body, without her consent, almost always by a man. It is painful and causes harm – not just physical injury but often lifelong, serious emotional distress: flashbacks, nightmares, anxiety, depression, difficulty forming normal relationships and even guilt.

Starting from one extreme, some radical feminists appear to believe that most if not all sex involving a man and a woman is a rape. The man is always the perpetrator, and the woman, a victim. Clearly, there are activities that are not forcible rape and do not involve the same emotional reaction, but are still not legitimate. These would include statutory rape, “date rape” and seduction. To suggest that a woman ‘s dress or behavior might in some cases have contributed is, of course, unacceptable.

At the other extreme, radical Muslims appear to believe that rape rarely if ever occurs, and that all non-marital contact between a man and a woman is illegitimate and the fault of the temptress. From the fury directed at Akin, you’d think he had advocated Shariah law and “honor” killings.

Then there’s the question of what to do if rape leads to pregnancy. Should there be a death penalty for rape? In the U.S., few advocate executing the rapist. Under Shariah, the rape victim might be executed, at least if she is not pregnant. But what about the rapist’s baby?

What happens in an abortion? A woman’s body is penetrated by instruments, usually in the hands of a man. The woman will have signed a consent form – but all too often because she felt she had “no choice.” The procedure is painful and bloody. Occasionally, serious physical injury occurs, sometimes even causing death of the mother. Judging from the million or so postings on the nonjudgmental website afterabortion.com, long-term emotional consequences are not uncommon, whatever official medical publications might say.

This procedure is almost always “legitimate” (legal) in the U.S. by order of the U.S. Supreme Court. It is the most common elective surgical procedure. We have lost as much as one-third of our younger generation because of it. The vast majority of Americans have been touched by it in some way. Of course it is emotional and divisive.

Politicians who claim to be pro-life are often adamant about preserving an exception for rape or incest. This exception is a fig leaf over the reality of what an abortion is. Coming too close to The Question is feared to jeopardize the chance to gain political power.

Akin’s phrasing became a convenient pretext for raising a disproportionate clamor as a diversion from the real problem. Those politicians and commentators who are calling for Akin’s head have signaled where their priorities lie.

http://www.wnd.com/2012/08/akin-not-far-off-base-in-rape-comment/

[_just me]

What is it that is hypocritical?

[_just me]

The procedure is painful and bloody. Occasionally, serious physical injury occurs, sometimes even causing death of the mother.

Sounds like childbirth.

[_just me]

Why Are Rape Victims More -- Not Less -- Likely To Get Pregnant?

Representative Todd Akin of Missouri made two mistakes when he claimed "From what I understand from doctors, it's really rare. If it's a legitimate rape, the female body has ways to try to shut the whole thing down."

His first mistake was linguistic. The term "legitimate rape" is an oxymoron. "Legitimate rape" does not exist. End of story.

His second mistake was believing the "doctors" who gave him the idea that the female body can "shut the whole thing down." (According to the LA Times, the "doctors" was one Jack C. Wilke, a prominent anti-abortionist physician and past president of the National Right To Life Committee.)

But is there evidence to support this claim? After all, in some species, females do have the ability to rid their body of unwanted semen. Chickens, for example. Researchers at the University of Sheffield studied this phenomenon in flocks of free-ranging chickens. The scientists found most sexual interactions between roosters and hens are coerced. (I was not surprised; I used to raise chickens.) I was surprised, however, to learn that hens had the ability to eject sperm from their reproductive tracts. Further, hens are choosy about it. The researcher found that hens were much more likely to eject the semen of low-ranking "forced copulators" than the rapists at the top of the social hierarchy who presumably have better genes. In spiders, this is called "sperm dumping."

So a biological anti-pregnancy mechanism exists in chickens and spiders that kicks in during forced copulations. Is there any evidence that a similar mechanism exists in human females? Are Representative Akin and Dr. Wilke right?

No. In fact, human females seem to be more likely to get pregnant when raped than when they have consensual sex!

The Evidence That Rape More Often Leads to Conception

The evidence that women are more likely to get pregnant by rape is described in this article in the journal Human Nature by Jonathan and Tiffani Gottschall. Between November 1995 and May 1996, the National Institute of Justice, the National Center for Injury Prevention and Control and the Centers for Disease Control jointly conducted a telephone survey of 8,000 randomly selected American women. Some of the questions dealt with rape and subsequent pregnancy. Four hundred and five of the women indicated they had been raped exactly one time. The Gottschalls used this data to compare the chances of getting pregnant via a rape versus consensual sex.

The Results

Twenty six of the women who had been raped became pregnant -- a pregnancy rate of 6.42 percent. (This increased to 8 percent when adjusted for contraceptive use.)

If you think that this is a low pregnancy rate, you are wrong. Contrary to what most people think, humans are among the most infertile of species. The most widely cited research on this topic was a study of the relationship between pregnancy and the timing of intercourse among women who were trying to get conceive here. Naturally, the researchers found that the odds of pregnancy changed with the women's menstrual cycles. Among the "regular cyclers," a woman's chances of conceiving ranged from a high of 9 percent if they had sex on day 13 of their cycle to 0 percent when they were having their period. Over the entire cycle, however, a woman's chances getting pregnant from one act of intercourse was 3.1 percent. This finding is consistent with other studies of human fertility.

In short, women are at least twice as likely to conceive as a result of rape than by consensual sex.

Why Should Pregnancy Be More Common During Rape?

Why does rape result in increased risk of pregnancy? This remains an open question. The Gottschalls reject some possibilities. These include the idea that rape induces ovulation, (copulation does stimulate the release of an egg in some species), that rapists have more virile sperm, and that rapists possess a special capacity to detect women who are ovulating. They do toss out a couple of conjectures they consider reasonable. The first is that rapists target women who are particularly fertile based on factors such as beauty and age. The second is that women unconsciously "broadcast cues about their ovulatory status that men are capable of registering and interpreting." These hypothetical unconscious cues could be physiological (e.g. body odor, subtle changes in skin tone) or behavioral. To their credit, however, the authors admit that there is little evidence to support their conjectures.

So, sorry Rep. Akin... there is no evidence that human females have a biological mechanism that prevents pregnancy during rape. If anything, it appears that women who are sexually assaulted are MORE rather than less likely to conceive.

Maybe you should start seeing different doctors.

[_just me]

Oh hey, here is a list of children who clearly were not "legitimately raped" since they got pregnant.

Note the youngest birth mother on record was 5 years old.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_yo ... th_mothers

[_just me]

Sorry for the old stats.

UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

Somewhere in America, a woman is raped every 2 minutes, according to the U.S. Department of Justice.

In 1995, 354,670 women were the victims of a rape or sexual assault. (NationalCrime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.)

Over the last two years, more than 787,000 women were the victim of a rape or sexual assault. (National Crime Victimization Survey. Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S.Department of Justice, 1996.)

The FBI estimates that 72 of every 100,000 females in the United States were raped last year. (Federal Bureau of Investigation, Uniform Crime Statistics, 1996.)

SILENT VICTIMS :

One of the most startling aspects of sex crimes is how many go unreported. The most common reasons given by women for not reporting these crimes are the belief that it is a private or personal matter and the fear of reprisal from the assailant.

Approximately 28% of victims are raped by husbands or boyfriends, 35% by acquaintances, and 5% by other relatives. (Violence against Women, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Dept. of Justice, 1994)

The FBI estimates that only 37% of all rapes are reported to the police. U.S. Justice Department statistics are even lower, with only 26% of all rapes or attempted rapes being reported to law enforcement officials.

In 1994-1995, only 251,560 rapes and sexual assaults were reported to law enforcement officials -- less than one in every three. (National Crime Victimization Survey, Bureau of Justice Statistics, U.S. Department of Justice, 1996.)

An overwhelming majority of rape service agencies believe that public education about rape, and expanded counseling and advocacy services for rape victims, would be effective in increasing the willingness of victims to report rapes to the police. (Rape in America, 1992, National Victim Center with Crime Victims Research and Treatment Center.)

http://www.rape.co.za/index.php?option= ... iew&id=875

[_beastie]

I KNEW you would support Akin. I just knew it. I have no doubt ldsfaq does as well.

While Akin's comments, as well as the republican platform, are disgusting, it is nice when republicans accidentally reveal their true agenda.

[_beastie]

Just think of all the babies Mitt Romney's sons killed when they used IVF to conceive. It's shocking that a man who has baby-killers for sons is allowed to represent the republican party.

What's even more shocking is that Mitt claims he would support the personhood amendment, which would make his sons criminals. And now he claims that he allows exceptions for rape and incest.

[_just me]

I KNEW you would support Akin. I just knew it. I have no doubt ldsfaq does as well.

While Akin's comments, as well as the republican platform, are disgusting, it is nice when republicans accidentally reveal their true agenda.

It looks like BCspace has decided not to come back to this thread. LOL I wonder why!

[_krose]

Why am I not surprised that the text in BC's post contains nothing to support the subject and first line of his post? I wasted time reading through that entire pointless WND drivel and never got to the part about a "top Doc" or "hypocrisy."

At any rate, it's not controversial to say that a single sexual encounter (rape or otherwise) has a relative low chance of resulting in a pregnancy, simply because the period of fertility is only a couple of days a month, and conception isn't ensured even during those days. Any couple who has engaged in an intentional effort to have a baby knows that it can sometimes take a lot of trying.