The Duplicity of Feminist Researcher Mary Koss


By Deadboi Speedy

After watching a couple of the Honey Badger Radio Monologues done by Hannah Wallen regarding Mary Koss’s impact on the rape narrative and the gendering of domestic violence issues, shown here:

I got really curious about the feminist duplicity that lead the way the conversations about rape, domestic violence and sexual assault have been framed. While I won’t be covering the Violence Against Women Act for now because there is ALOT more to sift through when it comes to contextualizing that, but today I wanted to cover one of the leading voices of the “Rape Culture” narrative who happened to gain quite a bit of power and be an influence for things like V.A.W.A, the FBI and CDC’s definitions of rape, The Duluth Model and Title IX etc etc

From the information I gathered, Mary Koss’s lens that she views gender relations and society from was inspired from a book by one of her feminist allies named Susan Brownmiller. The name of the book was called Against Our Will: Men, Women and Rape that was built around the idea that rape and abuse was a tool by men to oppress women and maintain patriarchal power.

Nonetheless, her rise to prominence started when she was one of the researchers involved in a set of studies on rape commissioned by Gloria Steinem’s Ms. Magazine to show the prevalence of rape and gain funding and female-centric government support for the cause.

Which is how we ended up with the faulty “1 in 3” Campus rape statistic and others like it. So due to the amount of fear caused by these studies that were also provided to Joe Biden and others in government, a local newspaper in Ohio called “The Toledo Blade” did a 3 part series called “Rape: The Making of An Epidemic” where two investigative journalists known as Nara Schoenberg and Sam Roe interviewed the researchers, the credible data around the issue, and also dissected the Methodology used in these studies.

I managed to find archived Digitized versions of the newspapers these articles appeared in here:

Toledo Blade – Rape: The Making of An Epidemic:

Part 1:…

Part 2:…

Part 3:…

For each study shown, there were notes covering the flaws in the line of questioning done to the people being interviewed for these surveys and what’s also revealed was comments from Margaret Gordon and others that they were being pressured to make male on female rape sound like a much bigger issue than it was.

It’s worth noting that this is what was said in the article regarding the Methodology used by the researchers:

“Researchers say they can just as easily design a study that finds 1 in 4 women have been raped as 1 in 50. A slight change in the definition of rape or the way questions are worded can yield dramatically different results. Scientists responsible for the highest numbers are passionate advocates who believe rape is very common. This troubles even some in the field.
One scientist is a self-described radical feminist. Another conducted her study with the backing of Ms. Magazine, for years a leading voice in the women’s movement. Still another helped open one of the country’s first rape crisis centers. All told, some critics conclude the rape numbers are inflated. They charge this has been done to boost support for the cause.

Christina Hoff Sommers also covered this issue at length in her book “Who Stole Feminism?” and you can read excerpts from the book here:

It’s also worth noting that when the Center for Disease Control did it’s studies on this topic, it followed the same flawed methodology and that was most likely by design due to Mary Kossh having pull with the Center for Disease Control.

Here’s an overview of Mary’s history with the Center for Disease Control:

* 1996: Expert Panel Member, “Definitions of Sexual Assault,” Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
* 2003 : Selected to direct the Sexual Violence Applied Research Advisory Group,, the national online resource on violence against women funded by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention;
* 2003 : Member, team of expert advisers, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention on teen partner violence;
* 2003 : Panel of Experts, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, National Center for Injury Prevention and Control on scales to measure intimate partner violence, resulted in the publication of CDC Intimate Partner Violence compendium, 2005;
* 2003-4: Consultant, Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, CDC Intimate Partner Violence compendium, 2005 IPV Compendium on assessment of sexual violence and inclusion as recommended standard assessments in the field of two Koss-authored assessments (Sexual Experiences Survey-victimization, and Sexual Experiences Survey-perpetration)

Why do I bring this up you may ask?
Largely because as I mentioned earlier Mary Koss and others like her got the Center for Disease Control and FBI to change the rape definitions to these, respectively:

FBI: “penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim.”

Center for Disease Control:

* Among women, rape includes vaginal, oral, or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes vaginal or anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object.

* Among men, rape includes oral or anal penetration by a male using his penis. It also includes anal penetration by a male or female using their fingers or an object.

Which brings me to my next topic regarding why FBI and Advocacy research outlets do not consider a man being forced to penetrate the same as rape. If anyone ever wonders why the CDC studies had “Forced to Penetrate” and “Rape” as two different categories, Mary Koss is one of the key reasons why.

Cathy Young talks about the flaws in CDC’s numbers here:

“And now the real surprise: when asked about experiences in the last 12 months, men reported being “made to penetrate”—either by physical force or due to intoxication—at virtually the same rates as women reported rape (both 1.1 percent in 2010, and 1.7 and 1.6 respectively in 2011).
In other words, if being made to penetrate someone was counted as rape—and why shouldn’t it be?—then the headlines could have focused on a truly sensational CDC finding: that women rape men as often as men rape women.
The CDC also reports that men account for over a third of those experiencing another form of sexual violence—“sexual coercion.” That was defined as being pressured into sexual activity by psychological means: lies or false promises, threats to end a relationship or spread negative gossip, or “making repeated requests” for sex and expressing unhappiness at being turned down.

Should we, then, regard sexual violence as a reciprocal problem? Getting away from the simplistic and adversarial “war against women” model is undoubtedly a positive step, as is admitting that women are human beings with the capacity for aggression and wrongdoing—including sexual assault. On the other hand, most of us would agree that to equate a victim of violent rape and a man who engages in a drunken sexual act he wouldn’t have chosen when sober is to trivialize a terrible crime. It is safe to assume that the vast majority of the CDC’s male respondents who were “made to penetrate” someone would not call themselves rape victims—and with good reason.

But if that’s the case, it is just as misleading to equate a woman’s experience of alcohol-addled sex with the experience of a rape victim who is either physically overpowered or attacked when genuinely incapacitated. For purely biological reasons, there is little doubt that adult victims of such crimes are mostly female—though male children and adolescents are at fairly high risk: as criminologists Richard Felson and Patrick Cundiff report in a fascinating recent analysis, a 15-year-old male is considerably more likely to be sexually assaulted than a woman over 40. The CDC reports that 12.3 percent of female victims were 10 or younger at the time of their first completed rape victimization; for male victims, that number is 27.8 percent.

We must either start treating sexual assault as a gender-neutral issue or stop using the CDC’s inflated statistics. Few would deny that sex crimes in America are a real, serious, and tragic problem. But studies of sexual violence should use accurate and clear definitions of rape and sexual assault, rather than lump these criminal acts together with a wide range of unsavory but non-criminal scenarios of men—and women—behaving badly.”

Anyway, the reasoning provided by Mary Koss for categorizing them differently was provided here, where she had this to say:

Detecting the Scope of Rape : A Review of Prevalence Research Methods. Author: Mary P. Koss.
Journal of Interpersonal Violence Volume: 8 Issue: 2 Dated: (June 1993) Page: 206…

“Although consideration of male victims is within the scope of the legal statutes, it is important to restrict the term rape to instances where male victims were penetrated by offenders. It is inappropriate to consider as a rape victim a man who engages in unwanted sexual intercourse with a woman.”

However when she was pressed on this in a later interview, this is what she had to say regarding this:

 “How do they react to rape. If you look at this group of men who identify themselves as rape victims raped by women you’ll find that their shame is not similar to women, their level of injury is not similar to women and their penetration experience is not similar to what women are reporting.”

Theresa Phung: “For the men who are traumatized by their experiences because they were forced against their will to vaginally penetrate a woman..”

Dr. Mary P. Koss: “How would that happen…how would that happen by force or threat of force or when the victim is unable to consent? How does that happen?”

Theresa Phung: “So I am actually speaking to someone right now. his story is that he was drugged, he was unconscious and when he awoke a woman was on top of him with his penis inserted inside her vagina, and for him that was traumatizing.”

Dr. Mary P. Koss: “Yeah.”

Theresa Phung: “If he was drugged what would that be called?”

Dr. Mary P. Koss: “What would I call it? I would call it ‘unwanted contact’.”

Theresa Phung: “Just ‘unwanted contact’ period?”

Dr. Mary P. Koss: “Yeah.”

If this makes your blood boil then it doesn’t get better when you hear it all in audio here: (Skip to the 8:15 Mark)

Especially when one considers the way she seems to have deliberately done her best over the years to inflate the rape statistics as well as deliberately use gender exclusionary definitions of rape to obfuscate the amount of rapes done by women to men.

There’s a study on this particular issue covered here and it’s not the only study:

So when feminists tell you that the reason people think Women cant rape or why women forcing men to penetrate is not being taken seriously by FBI or researchers is because of the Patriarchy, be more than happy to show them that the Feminist movement is not innocent in any of this.

Largely these studies sole purpose has been to get government funding, Authoritarian government control over people’s sex lives, and of course to demonize men. The more and more I look into this stuff, the more I find out that Feminism stopped being about equality A LONG TIME AGO and it’s really a shame too. A movement that fights for the rights and opportunities of any group is always a good thing when they are principles and intellectually honest but sadly that’s been thrown out of the window by establishment/gender feminism.

Along with that this is just one piece of the puzzle that shows that a lot of the leftist/feminist rape narrative is built on word games and deception.

I would definitely love to do a write up on the Duluth Model and VAWA but I still need to do more research on the issue before I do.

Facebooktwitterredditpinterestmailby feather

About the author

Badger Eyes
By Badger Eyes

Listen to Honey Badger Radio!

Support Alison, Brian and Hannah creating HBR Content!

Recent Posts

Recent Comments





Follow Us

Facebooktwitterrssyoutubeby feather