Talk:Rape trauma syndrome

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
News This article has been mentioned by multiple media organizations:
WikiProject Psychology  
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Psychology, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Psychology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject Medicine (Rated C-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Medicine, which recommends that this article follow the Manual of Style for medicine-related articles and use high-quality medical sources. Please visit the project page for details or ask questions at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Medicine.
C-Class article C  This article has been rated as C-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Gender[edit]

This article seems to assume that all rape victims are women. I'm quite certain this is innaccurate.Brandonrc2 (talk) 04:20, 25 June 2009 (UTC)

In general, gender will come to reflect those most ehavily working on it. Natural thing to do. Since yes women are raped considerably more (at least in open society; prison notwithstanding,) and since the physical effects can be a fair bit higher than our own, well, its just an editing thing. Im sure no one would object to it being gender neutral, but thats not really an urgent thing since as you yourself stated, this stuff is fairly obvious. Still, its an improvement to be made, but not a core peice of the article needing real attention. Right now, id say its "Accurate Enough For Our Needs." 74.132.249.206 (talk) 20:38, 30 August 2011 (UTC)

Survivors vs. victims?[edit]

The repeated use of the term "survivor" in association with a rape bothers me: in my opinion it suggests that victims usually don't survive the ordeal and that the fact that the victim is still alive after the aggression is something worth pointing out. I don't know the numbers but I assume most rape victims do not die during or as a consequence of a rape. Therefore, I would suggest replacing "survivor" by the more neutral term "victim" which seems to better suit the purpose. 85.180.83.36 (talk) 23:14, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

I agree. Survivor is just a comfort word, to show they can survive this ordeal, and get on with their lives, no longer waking up screaming at night afraid to leave the house and suffering from flashbacks and whatnot. Dream Focus 23:33, 12 May 2011 (UTC)

Just because the Victim / Survivor is alive after an attack doesn't mean that nothing had died during it, what about one's prevous lifestyle, conferdence, self esteem, ect .. That persons life will change forever, That person would lose a lot more then just a life. so My veiw is victim or survivor it doesn't really matter but as Victims have been through a lot already it's nice to have something to lighten the blow.— Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.183.140.36 (talkcontribs)

Well thats important stuff but there was no actual physical death. An encyclopedic entry cant make much use of personal beliefe, as that tends to confilct with true reality, even if the true is unpleasant. One example i can think of easily was the BP oil spill, and the parents of one of the slain basically discounting all the ecological harm it coulda done in favor of saying their son was more important than that.
Of course, no, he really isnt, this is not an uncommon or out of context reaction. No one blames them for it, its natural. But its not encyclopedic. Instead, you should try focusing on the specifics, the long term disorders and look for sources to help support that. for the record, I think "Victim" is better, but that is a heavily loaded word so we should use it with great care and consideration. We all know the tragedies that can befall one falsely accused of rape, and a victim mentality would only make the situation worse -- again, no oens blaming them. It would be a time of confusion, fear ,injustice...But that situation and the way even the innocent can be destroyed by it, should warrant extra caution. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 20:47, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
Clarification: Just to be sure its understood. In my example i am talking about the devestation to biodiversity. The emotional impact is a whole different matter all together, as is the legal impact. But total destruction of fragile sea life is a bigger concern, for the world, for the long term. I hope it didnt come off as too insensitive. Trying to find the balance is always hard. 74.132.249.206 (talk) 20:50, 30 August 2011 (UTC)
However, false accusations of rape are extremely rare [1] (particularly compared to unreported rapes - the National Institute of Justice estimates that of the 20% of female college students who become rape victims, around 5% report - so around 19% of women who go to college are unreported rape victims[2][3]), and it feels like your mention of it comes out of nowhere. It's also completely irrelevant. People who are raped are obviously victims - by the definition of the word victim! - and people don't develop RTS if they haven't been raped; this is not an article about false accusations of rape, and your discussion would be better over there (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_accusation_of_rape). Victim is a perfectly appropriate word here, and claiming it oughtn't be used because of the possibility of a false accusation is honestly very silly and immature. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.161.189.17 (talkcontribs) 20:59, 22 May 2013‎

First-person accounts[edit]

--Pawyilee (talk) 06:24, 2 September 2014 (UTC)