http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/01/03/a-rape-map-of-india/

What is the next step? Calculate against populate density?

Edit: Read the article now


Delhi has long been considered one of the most unsafe big cities for women in India. And north India is often referred to as more violent, more patriarchal, and more crime-ridden than the south.

To add some perspective to this debate, here is a look at statistics on reported rapes around the country.

These data carry the caveat that there may be higher reporting rates in different areas and reporting is not necessarily indicative of the prevalence of the crime. Victims may be reluctant to report rape because of fears their case will not be taken seriously and police may be reluctant to register complaints.

In 2011, a total of 24,206 rape cases were registered in India, according to data released by the National Crime Records Bureau.

Of those, 6,227 were reported in northern India, which we defined as nine northern states: Haryana, Himachal Pradesh, Uttar Pradesh, Jammu & Kashmir, Rajasthan, Punjab, Uttarakhand, as well as the regions of Delhi and Chandigarh.

The reported number in the south – Andhra Pradesh, Karnataka, Tamil Nadu, Kerala and Puducherry – was 3,894 cases.


Raveendran/Agence France-Presse/Getty Images
Demonstrators held placards in a silent protest expressing solidarity with the gangrape victim in New Delhi, Jan. 1.
There were 1.02 rapes reported per 100,000 in 2011 in Uttar Pradesh, which has a population of 199.6 million. In Andhra Pradesh, the equivalent figure was 1.70 per 100,000; its population is 84.7 million.

The north and south together account for 10,121 cases, approximately 40% of the 2011 reported rapes.

The eastern, north-eastern, western and central states account for the remainder.

In the northeast – Arunachal Pradesh, Assam, Manipur, Meghalaya, Mizoram, Nagaland, Sikkim and Tripura – 2,246 cases were reported in 2011.

In eastern India — Bihar, Odisha and West Bengal – there were 4,409 rapes reported, more than in all of southern India.

The central and western states of Jharkhand, Madhya Pradesh, Chhattisgarh, Maharashtra, Gujarat, and Goa (as well as the regions of Dadra & Nagar Haveli and Daman & Diu) accounted for 7,417 cases.

According to the NCRB, in 2011, Murshidabad, a district in West Bengal, recorded the highest number of reported rapes for a single district (433 cases) and of molestation cases (621.)

Chhattisgarh’s Durg Bhilainagar reported the highest rate of reported rape per 100,000 residents, at 5.7, more than double Delhi’s ratio of 2.8 per 100,000.

Some experts say northern India is perhaps worse than elsewhere in that women may have a harder time in registering complaints effectively.

Vrinda Grover, a lawyer in the Supreme Court, says that in northern India “women are not comfortable going up to the police and filing a complaint or, in a similar situation, the police don’t lodge a complaint.”

That has been borne out by the recent news of an 18-year-old girl in the northern state of Punjab, who complained to police in November that she was gang raped by three men but committed suicide last week because of alleged police inaction.

According to a report in Outlook Magazine, the police registered her complaint 14 days after the incident took place and asked uncomfortable questions every time she went to follow-up on her complaint.

One police official in the woman’s village of Badshahpur has been disciplined, said Patiala’s Superintendent of Crime Jaipal Singh on Wednesday without divulging further details.

Since the gang-rape and death of a 23-year-old physiotherapy student in Delhi last month, further incidents of rape have been reported prominently in India’s newspapers.

The Times of India reported two in Wednesday’s edition, both in Uttar Pradesh. The Asian Age reported an attempt by five men in Delhi to kidnap and rape a 24-year-old woman.

However, activists play down the notion that one area of the country is inherently safer for women than others.

“I’m afraid we do not have enlightened zones anywhere in the country,” said Ms. Grover.

Ruth Manorama, president of the National Alliance for Women, added: “It is not a north India phenomena, it is an all India phenomena.”

i have never said southern india is a paradise for women. so this sort of mindless anger and indignation will not elicit much of a response from me because it is mindless.

however, one cannot deny that cultural factors do not play into this phenomenon. in particular, the value of a woman in society as measured by the sex ratio, particularly the sex ratios at birth and in the 0-6 age group. IMO there appears to be an excellent correlation between the frequency of rape in the population and the sex ratios. it might be interesting to plot the per capita rapes against the sex ratios in the 0-6 group as available from the census. yes correlation does not imply causation, but one would be stupid to ignore strong correlations.

Much of the southern rapes must be in Keral, in the North in Delhi region, in J & K - the gun owners.

Uppili wrote:Much of the southern rapes must be in Keral, in the North in Delhi region, in J & K - the gun owners.

madhya pradesh is the worst.

Il Professore, in your persistent efforts to cut off your nose to spite your face, in not recognizing a problem that encompasses all of India, you have become nothing more than a caricature.

Kerala is the most literate state in India and the male-female ratio is fine too. Why are there the max # of rapes there compared to the rest of the south? It's also the smallest state of all the south indian states. The above logic doesn't seem to apply

btw, there are almost 4000 rape cases reported in the south. As a south indian woman, it enrages me when ppl act as if it's a north indian problem and go into some stupid analytical mode to point fingers at them while ignoring the problem in the south. That's gross injustice to the women from the south. A sexual assault is a sexual assault, whether it happens in the north or south or east or west. Pls don't reduce it to numbers and statistics. It's a problem of the whole of india and needs to be dealt with seriously everywhere.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have never said southern india is a paradise for women. so this sort of mindless anger and indignation will not elicit much of a response from me because it is mindless.

however, one cannot deny that cultural factors do not play into this phenomenon. in particular, the value of a woman in society as measured by the sex ratio, particularly the sex ratios at birth and in the 0-6 age group. IMO there appears to be an excellent correlation between the frequency of rape in the population and the sex ratios. it might be interesting to plot the per capita rapes against the sex ratios in the 0-6 group as available from the census. yes correlation does not imply causation, but one would be stupid to ignore strong correlations.

"There were 1.02 rapes reported per 100,000 in 2011 in Uttar Pradesh, which has a population of 199.6 million. In Andhra Pradesh, the equivalent figure was 1.70 per 100,000; its population is 84.7 million."

Let's start with sex ratio of these two states. I don't know what they are, but let's start on the proof of your theory.

here's how max's warped logic would be: 'Groping and molestations don't happen in the south coz my female cousins who traveled in chennai buses were never groped or molested.' Yeah, right! How do you know that for sure? Do you expect your female cousins to declare to you every time they were groped in public places? duh!

Why blame Rashmun for his posting every day his positive views on Mughal empire?

ignoring the caustic remark about professor, ha above summarized the rape problem. Indian society has a rape, female child discrimination problem.
nenu 's comment on si groping is also reflective of realities. it is nite a regional issue.
if statistics were available one may even find that the number of higher caste perpetrators is lower in cities but higher in villages. but the usefulness of such stats is minimal at bedtime.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:i have never said southern india is a paradise for women. so this sort of mindless anger and indignation will not elicit much of a response from me because it is mindless.

Mindless anger and indignation? Where is the anger, and where is the indignation? I merely copy pasted your own news article. Also, I call you out on your own statements. How is that mindless?

You don't get a higher hand in anything by making big statements like, 'will not elicit much of a response from me'. If you are stating something this grave, be prepared to be questioned, and be prepared to back up your statements, or else there is no point in making those statements. Ya?

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
You don't get a higher hand in anything by making big statements like, 'will not elicit much of a response from me'. If you are stating something this grave, be prepared to be questioned, and be prepared to back up your statements, or else there is no point in making those statements. Ya?

This is not fair...not at all fair.... Nenu and Vidya having a 3-some with MAX right in full public view of other (envious) SuCHers..

Uppili wrote:

Vidya Bagchi wrote:
You don't get a higher hand in anything by making big statements like, 'will not elicit much of a response from me'. If you are stating something this grave, be prepared to be questioned, and be prepared to back up your statements, or else there is no point in making those statements. Ya?

This is not fair...not at all fair.... Nenu and Vidya having a 3-some with MAX right in full public view of other (envious) SuCHers..

Oh you didn't notice Impy! She's indirectly showing her solidarity and support for max from the side and trying to protect him from these two bad women

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:http://blogs.wsj.com/indiarealtime/2013/01/03/a-rape-map-of-india/

>>>Heck, this is not flattering for any part of India. And that is without considering the rapes that went unreported or were not registered by the police.

kerala is an interesting case and i have never been able to understand it. also TN and AP have gotten worse since the last census wrt the sex ratios in the 0-6 age group.

in general however, when fertile women become scarcer in the population, violence against women increases. this is a phenomenon that has been hypothesized by sociologists and we are seeing it play out in india. the differences between the regions are interesting because it gives us a chance to test this hypothesis.

http://chartsbin.com/view/1193

It is clear that rapes happen in every state in India - north or south. Reported cases don't show the real picture on the ground. When I was growing up, it was common to hear about who among the village folk is having a fling with which woman (and in which field!). A couple of young fellows were given the "dEhasuddhi" treatment for harassing girls. However, it was uncommon for young girls to report on rapes (for various reasons). To avoid being raped, the working class people got their daughters married off young and most young girls didn't venture out alone. Hopefully, things have changed now, with men becoming less cowardly and women feeling more secure.

While we are on this topic, here is some interesting news:

http://ibnlive.in.com/news/now-a-lingerie-equipped-with-gps-system-to-fight-sexual-crimes/382181-3.html

Now all that is needed is to make a device that detects a "hot, cylindrical thingy" and blows it up.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:however, one cannot deny that cultural factors do not play into this phenomenon. in particular, the value of a woman in society as measured by the sex ratio, particularly the sex ratios at birth and in the 0-6 age group. IMO there appears to be an excellent correlation between the frequency of rape in the population and the sex ratios. it might be interesting to plot the per capita rapes against the sex ratios in the 0-6 group as available from the census. yes correlation does not imply causation, but one would be stupid to ignore strong correlations.

On the face of it, I can't see such a correlation. I shall explore this in more detail this evening.

I agree with you that there is value in looking into the data behind gruesome phenomena and subjecting them to statistical analyses. That is the only way to infer the causes of social problems, and is a prerequisite for solving them. I don't buy the idea that performing such an analysis amounts to disregarding the human story involved in each of the incidents in the overall data set. Comparing the prevalence of rape, and hypothesizing a correlation to child sex ratio does not amount to devaluing the story of any victim of rape. There is a good reason that the United Nations' overarching goals for the short-to-medium-term progress of humanity -- the Millennium Development Goals -- are expressed in terms of such morbid statistics as maternal mortality rate. Every instance of a mother dying due to complications related to childbirth in the 21st century is an awful waste of human potential and devastating for her immediate relations. And without studying the incidents statistically and comparing trends over time and place, it is not possible to prioritize resource allocation, design effective interventions to solve the problem, and measure the effectiveness of those interventions in solving the problem.

nenu wrote:btw, there are almost 4000 rape cases reported in the south. As a south indian woman, it enrages me when ppl act as if it's a north indian problem and go into some stupid analytical mode to point fingers at them while ignoring the problem in the south. That's gross injustice to the women from the south. A sexual assault is a sexual assault, whether it happens in the north or south or east or west. Pls don't reduce it to numbers and statistics. It's a problem of the whole of india and needs to be dealt with seriously everywhere.

I haven't kept up with all the threads on this over the weekend, but why is statistical analysis of the incidence of rape and correlating it with factors related to the status of women offensive? If you want to identify why those sexual assaults take place, avoiding analysis is not going to help.

trofimov wrote:

nenu wrote:btw, there are almost 4000 rape cases reported in the south. As a south indian woman, it enrages me when ppl act as if it's a north indian problem and go into some stupid analytical mode to point fingers at them while ignoring the problem in the south. That's gross injustice to the women from the south. A sexual assault is a sexual assault, whether it happens in the north or south or east or west. Pls don't reduce it to numbers and statistics. It's a problem of the whole of india and needs to be dealt with seriously everywhere.

I haven't kept up with all the threads on this over the weekend, but why is statistical analysis of the incidence of rape and correlating it with factors related to the status of women offensive? If you want to identify why those sexual assaults take place, avoiding analysis is not going to help.

guess it all began with this "analysis" https://such.forumotion.com/t12039-india-ranked-behind-pakistan-in-undp-measure-of-gender-equality#92685

and then this https://such.forumotion.com/t12074-why-is-india-so-bad-for-women#92910

So I ran the numbers, and it confirms my hunch that there is little correlation between child gender ratio and rate of rapes reported. Child gender ratio is the number of girls per 1,000 boys of age 6 or below, per Census of India website at http://censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/A-Series/A-Series_links/t_00_004.aspx. For rate of rapes reported, I used the numbers from the map above, divided by population rounded to the nearest million.

The coefficient of correlation between the two variables is a paltry 0.22. Here is a plot of the two variables.


As can be seen here, there is no clear pattern. I also plotted this after removing the clear outliers Mizoram and Tripura, but it does not alter the outcome. As expected, the correlation coefficient actually worsens when we remove those outliers (the chart shows a hint of a correlation because of those two relatively small data points).

Tri,
No one is opposed to a scientific study of data. The discussion is about ni was backward and men ofthat region are some kind of sexual deviants who commit rape at an alarmingly high rate than pious men of tn who don't grope women even in crowded buses.
Posters including nenu are pointing that rape and bad behaviour was a nation wide problem with little to choose between men of tn or north india.

Tri,
No one is opposed to a scientific study of data. The discussion is about ni was backward and men ofthat region are some kind of sexual deviants who commit rape at an alarmingly high rate than pious men of tn who don't grope women even in crowded buses.
Posters including nenu are pointing that rape and bad behaviour was a nation wide problem with little to choose between men of tn or north india.

trofimov wrote:So I ran the numbers, and it confirms my hunch that there is little correlation between child gender ratio and rate of rapes reported. Child gender ratio is the number of girls per 1,000 boys of age 6 or below, per Census of India website at http://censusindia.gov.in/Tables_Published/A-Series/A-Series_links/t_00_004.aspx. For rate of rapes reported, I used the numbers from the map above, divided by population rounded to the nearest million.

The coefficient of correlation between the two variables is a paltry 0.22. Here is a plot of the two variables.


As can be seen here, there is no clear pattern. I also plotted this after removing the clear outliers Mizoram and Tripura, but it does not alter the outcome. As expected, the correlation coefficient actually worsens when we remove those outliers (the chart shows a hint of a correlation because of those two relatively small data points).

That's quite comprehensive. I was willing to diss the theory as it was failed by 3 states mentioned. High Kerala #s in both. And AP having higher gender ratios as well as reported rapes than UP. I just didn't post the fail commens, coz it was serving no bigger purpose than slapping max with facts, which I figured he must have deducted himself when he posted the gender ratio link. What did surprise me was that he continued to ponder over it. And I won't be surprised if he still continues to...

I posted just the numbers in my previous post, and I want to focus on my opinions / explanations for what we see in the numbers.

I think it is a reasonable hypothesis that the position of women in a society -- the value that society attaches to women -- is related to the incidence of rape in a society. It is also a reasonable hypothesis that child sex ratio is a good indicator of the value a society places on its women. But we don't see a significant correlation between child sex ratio and incidence of reported rapes. Why?

I think this is because there are other hidden variables that are much stronger drivers of the three key factors we are studying: child sex ratio, the incidence of rape, and the percentage of rapes that get reported. The biggest, in my opinion, is the rural-urban divide. In rural areas of both northern and southern India, women are less likely to attempt to report a rape than their urban counterparts. This is because in rural societies, everybody knows everybody else, and has to face and deal with others in the village for the rest of their lives. A woman who reports a rape has to do so to a policeman who is typically well-connected within the village, and word will get out. Indian society in general views the victims of rape with stigma. I have watched several Indian movies -- in both Telugu and Hindi -- where the "hero's" sister is raped, and she commits suicide because of "shame" and to preserve the family's "honor." This stigma is present in urban areas as well, but an urban woman or her family can report a rape to the police without the certainty of everyone in their neighborhood knowing about it by the next morning. The relative anonymity of urban society, as well as the access to greater support for the victims in urban areas, increases the percentage of rapes that get reported in urban areas.

Child sex ratio also differs between rural and urban areas within the same state. It is better in rural areas because of the relative lack of access to safe gender-specific abortion. Finally, the nature of rape (and perhaps the frequency) also differs between rural and urban India. In rural India, rape is used as a sociopolitical tool for the suppression of the lower classes by the wealthy and privileged, and caste plays a big role in this. In urban India, middle class women who venture out of home for education and work also become victims of rape, besides poor working women in urban slums. Caste and sociopolitical agendas have a lot less to do with urban rapes.

My guess is that most of the numbers of reported rapes, in both north and south, occur in urban areas. Rural rapes largely go unreported, in both regions. I also guess urbanization is further along in the west and the south than it is in the north, the center, and the northeast. It would be interesting to do similar analysis accounting for the urban-rural divide in each state. I don't know if the data for such an analysis is readily available. Short of that, I don't think the numbers published in the original newspaper article are very useful in understanding the drivers of what is happening.

PP-- thanks for taking the time to plot the data as i suggested in my original post and thanks also for your thoughtful subsequent post. i agree that no strong suggestive correlation can be found between the available rape data and the 0-6 sex ratios. i largely agree with your analysis. underreporting is probably a large reason for the scatter in the data.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:PP-- thanks for taking the time to plot the data as i suggested in my original post and thanks also for your thoughtful subsequent post. i agree that no strong suggestive correlation can be found between the available rape data and the 0-6 sex ratios. i largely agree with your analysis. underreporting is probably a large reason for the scatter in the data.

Contrition for this?:
https://such.forumotion.com/t12089-a-rape-map-of-india#93008

trofimov wrote:I posted just the numbers in my previous post, and I want to focus on my opinions / explanations for what we see in the numbers.

I think it is a reasonable hypothesis that the position of women in a society -- the value that society attaches to women -- is related to the incidence of rape in a society. It is also a reasonable hypothesis that child sex ratio is a good indicator of the value a society places on its women. But we don't see a significant correlation between child sex ratio and incidence of reported rapes. Why?

I think this is because there are other hidden variables that are much stronger drivers of the three key factors we are studying: child sex ratio, the incidence of rape, and the percentage of rapes that get reported. The biggest, in my opinion, is the rural-urban divide. In rural areas of both northern and southern India, women are less likely to attempt to report a rape than their urban counterparts. This is because in rural societies, everybody knows everybody else, and has to face and deal with others in the village for the rest of their lives. A woman who reports a rape has to do so to a policeman who is typically well-connected within the village, and word will get out. Indian society in general views the victims of rape with stigma. I have watched several Indian movies -- in both Telugu and Hindi -- where the "hero's" sister is raped, and she commits suicide because of "shame" and to preserve the family's "honor." This stigma is present in urban areas as well, but an urban woman or her family can report a rape to the police without the certainty of everyone in their neighborhood knowing about it by the next morning. The relative anonymity of urban society, as well as the access to greater support for the victims in urban areas, increases the percentage of rapes that get reported in urban areas.

Child sex ratio also differs between rural and urban areas within the same state. It is better in rural areas because of the relative lack of access to safe gender-specific abortion. Finally, the nature of rape (and perhaps the frequency) also differs between rural and urban India. In rural India, rape is used as a sociopolitical tool for the suppression of the lower classes by the wealthy and privileged, and caste plays a big role in this. In urban India, middle class women who venture out of home for education and work also become victims of rape, besides poor working women in urban slums. Caste and sociopolitical agendas have a lot less to do with urban rapes.

My guess is that most of the numbers of reported rapes, in both north and south, occur in urban areas. Rural rapes largely go unreported, in both regions. I also guess urbanization is further along in the west and the south than it is in the north, the center, and the northeast. It would be interesting to do similar analysis accounting for the urban-rural divide in each state. I don't know if the data for such an analysis is readily available. Short of that, I don't think the numbers published in the original newspaper article are very useful in understanding the drivers of what is happening.

Excellent. I would like to mention few more areas relating to this issue.
The lack of women police in rural areas and for that matter in urban areas as well is a grave concern for the non reportage of the rape cases. Also most of the male officers remain insensitive to the rape victims. They further victimize the victim with their questions and even make the victim responsible saying they "invited" rape. This calls in for much awaited police reforms that weren't changed since 1861 police act.
I think the increasing attacks on women have a link with our patriarchal tradition. Growing sea of unemployed young men who view women’s success as the reason for their failure tend to vent out their anger on women.
And most gruesome thing is that the perpetrators in the majority of the rape cases are known to the woman/girl.
Change has to come in the way we raise our kids, treating both the sexes equally will go a long way in bringing about the safety to women.

trofimov wrote:I posted just the numbers in my previous post, and I want to focus on my opinions / explanations for what we see in the numbers.

I think it is a reasonable hypothesis that the position of women in a society -- the value that society attaches to women -- is related to the incidence of rape in a society. It is also a reasonable hypothesis that child sex ratio is a good indicator of the value a society places on its women. But we don't see a significant correlation between child sex ratio and incidence of reported rapes. Why?

I think this is because there are other hidden variables that are much stronger drivers of the three key factors we are studying: child sex ratio, the incidence of rape, and the percentage of rapes that get reported. The biggest, in my opinion, is the rural-urban divide. In rural areas of both northern and southern India, women are less likely to attempt to report a rape than their urban counterparts. This is because in rural societies, everybody knows everybody else, and has to face and deal with others in the village for the rest of their lives. A woman who reports a rape has to do so to a policeman who is typically well-connected within the village, and word will get out. Indian society in general views the victims of rape with stigma. I have watched several Indian movies -- in both Telugu and Hindi -- where the "hero's" sister is raped, and she commits suicide because of "shame" and to preserve the family's "honor." This stigma is present in urban areas as well, but an urban woman or her family can report a rape to the police without the certainty of everyone in their neighborhood knowing about it by the next morning. The relative anonymity of urban society, as well as the access to greater support for the victims in urban areas, increases the percentage of rapes that get reported in urban areas.

Child sex ratio also differs between rural and urban areas within the same state. It is better in rural areas because of the relative lack of access to safe gender-specific abortion. Finally, the nature of rape (and perhaps the frequency) also differs between rural and urban India. In rural India, rape is used as a sociopolitical tool for the suppression of the lower classes by the wealthy and privileged, and caste plays a big role in this. In urban India, middle class women who venture out of home for education and work also become victims of rape, besides poor working women in urban slums. Caste and sociopolitical agendas have a lot less to do with urban rapes.

My guess is that most of the numbers of reported rapes, in both north and south, occur in urban areas. Rural rapes largely go unreported, in both regions. I also guess urbanization is further along in the west and the south than it is in the north, the center, and the northeast. It would be interesting to do similar analysis accounting for the urban-rural divide in each state. I don't know if the data for such an analysis is readily available. Short of that, I don't think the numbers publish.ed in the original newspaper article are very useful in understanding the drivers of what is happening.

>>>This was my thought too. In fact, I was going to suggest a weighting factor for the level of urbanization before figuring out the correlation, but I think it will still be skewed. Even in urban areas, there must be a huge stigma attached to this and there really is no way of keeping these things private in Indian society, rural or urban.

Kris wrote:

trofimov wrote:I posted just the numbers in my previous post, and I want to focus on my opinions / explanations for what we see in the numbers.

I think it is a reasonable hypothesis that the position of women in a society -- the value that society attaches to women -- is related to the incidence of rape in a society. It is also a reasonable hypothesis that child sex ratio is a good indicator of the value a society places on its women. But we don't see a significant correlation between child sex ratio and incidence of reported rapes. Why?

I think this is because there are other hidden variables that are much stronger drivers of the three key factors we are studying: child sex ratio, the incidence of rape, and the percentage of rapes that get reported. The biggest, in my opinion, is the rural-urban divide. In rural areas of both northern and southern India, women are less likely to attempt to report a rape than their urban counterparts. This is because in rural societies, everybody knows everybody else, and has to face and deal with others in the village for the rest of their lives. A woman who reports a rape has to do so to a policeman who is typically well-connected within the village, and word will get out. Indian society in general views the victims of rape with stigma. I have watched several Indian movies -- in both Telugu and Hindi -- where the "hero's" sister is raped, and she commits suicide because of "shame" and to preserve the family's "honor." This stigma is present in urban areas as well, but an urban woman or her family can report a rape to the police without the certainty of everyone in their neighborhood knowing about it by the next morning. The relative anonymity of urban society, as well as the access to greater support for the victims in urban areas, increases the percentage of rapes that get reported in urban areas.

Child sex ratio also differs between rural and urban areas within the same state. It is better in rural areas because of the relative lack of access to safe gender-specific abortion. Finally, the nature of rape (and perhaps the frequency) also differs between rural and urban India. In rural India, rape is used as a sociopolitical tool for the suppression of the lower classes by the wealthy and privileged, and caste plays a big role in this. In urban India, middle class women who venture out of home for education and work also become victims of rape, besides poor working women in urban slums. Caste and sociopolitical agendas have a lot less to do with urban rapes.

My guess is that most of the numbers of reported rapes, in both north and south, occur in urban areas. Rural rapes largely go unreported, in both regions. I also guess urbanization is further along in the west and the south than it is in the north, the center, and the northeast. It would be interesting to do similar analysis accounting for the urban-rural divide in each state. I don't know if the data for such an analysis is readily available. Short of that, I don't think the numbers publish.ed in the original newspaper article are very useful in understanding the drivers of what is happening.

>>>This was my thought too. In fact, I was going to suggest a weighting factor for the level of urbanization before figuring out the correlation, but I think it will still be skewed. Even in urban areas, there must be a huge stigma attached to this and there really is no way of keeping these things private in Indian society, rural or urban.

I beg to differ with both of you. I think it is in urban areas (especially, middle class) where majority of rapes go unreported, folks in rural areas usually are not afraid of anyone unlike the middle class city dwellers, case in point, groping occurs a lot and is tolerated mostly in the cities. Caste/class related rapes may have been common in the villages a few decades ago but is not the case anymore.

MaxEntropy_Man wrote:PP-- thanks for taking the time to plot the data as i suggested in my original post and thanks also for your thoughtful subsequent post. i agree that no strong suggestive correlation can be found between the available rape data and the 0-6 sex ratios. i largely agree with your analysis. underreporting is probably a large reason for the scatter in the data.

These kind of correlations may help caucasian professors sell their books but the reality might be entirely different. My understanding is that the recent trend of gender disparity in India is mainly due to the burden (read dowry) of raising a female child, not much to do with respecting women.

confuzzled dude wrote:

Kris wrote:

trofimov wrote:I posted just the numbers in my previous post, and I want to focus on my opinions / explanations for what we see in the numbers.

I think it is a reasonable hypothesis that the position of women in a society -- the value that society attaches to women -- is related to the incidence of rape in a society. It is also a reasonable hypothesis that child sex ratio is a good indicator of the value a society places on its women. But we don't see a significant correlation between child sex ratio and incidence of reported rapes. Why?

I think this is because there are other hidden variables that are much stronger drivers of the three key factors we are studying: child sex ratio, the incidence of rape, and the percentage of rapes that get reported. The biggest, in my opinion, is the rural-urban divide. In rural areas of both northern and southern India, women are less likely to attempt to report a rape than their urban counterparts. This is because in rural societies, everybody knows everybody else, and has to face and deal with others in the village for the rest of their lives. A woman who reports a rape has to do so to a policeman who is typically well-connected within the village, and word will get out. Indian society in general views the victims of rape with stigma. I have watched several Indian movies -- in both Telugu and Hindi -- where the "hero's" sister is raped, and she commits suicide because of "shame" and to preserve the family's "honor." This stigma is present in urban areas as well, but an urban woman or her family can report a rape to the police without the certainty of everyone in their neighborhood knowing about it by the next morning. The relative anonymity of urban society, as well as the access to greater support for the victims in urban areas, increases the percentage of rapes that get reported in urban areas.

Child sex ratio also differs between rural and urban areas within the same state. It is better in rural areas because of the relative lack of access to safe gender-specific abortion. Finally, the nature of rape (and perhaps the frequency) also differs between rural and urban India. In rural India, rape is used as a sociopolitical tool for the suppression of the lower classes by the wealthy and privileged, and caste plays a big role in this. In urban India, middle class women who venture out of home for education and work also become victims of rape, besides poor working women in urban slums. Caste and sociopolitical agendas have a lot less to do with urban rapes.

My guess is that most of the numbers of reported rapes, in both north and south, occur in urban areas. Rural rapes largely go unreported, in both regions. I also guess urbanization is further along in the west and the south than it is in the north, the center, and the northeast. It would be interesting to do similar analysis accounting for the urban-rural divide in each state. I don't know if the data for such an analysis is readily available. Short of that, I don't think the numbers publish.ed in the original newspaper article are very useful in understanding the drivers of what is happening.

>>>This was my thought too. In fact, I was going to suggest a weighting factor for the level of urbanization before figuring out the correlation, but I think it will still be skewed. Even in urban areas, there must be a huge stigma attached to this and there really is no way of keeping these things private in Indian society, rural or urban.

I beg to differ with both of you. I think it is in urban areas (especially, middle class) where majority of rapes go unreported, folks in rural areas usually are not afraid of anyone unlike the middle class city dwellers, case in point, groping occurs a lot and is tolerated mostly in the cities. Caste/class related rapes may have been common in the villages a few decades ago but is not the case anymore.

>>>> Your guess is as good as mine with respect to this 'urban vs rural' chasm. My broader point was that given the stigma attached to this culturally, weighting the stats still won't overcome the skew in the correlation.

Kris wrote:

>>>> Your guess is as good as mine with respect to this 'urban vs rural' chasm. My broader point was that given the stigma attached to this culturally, weighting the stats still won't overcome the skew in the correlation.

There is no question about the cultural stigma attached; add the bureaucracy at every level of Govt. machinery, common man is discouraged of reporting these incidents. In any case, number of reported cases appear to be higher in the states with larger rural population. In fact, as reported in the article Durg (Chattisgarh) or Murshidbad (WB) where record number of cases were reported are not your typical Cosmo/Metropolis. One can argue that ~50% of urban population in TN could be the reason for lower number of registered cases.

confuzzled dude wrote:folks in rural areas usually are not afraid of anyone unlike the middle class city dwellers, case in point, groping occurs a lot and is tolerated mostly in the cities. Caste/class related rapes may have been common in the villages a few decades ago but is not the case anymore.

I think caste/class violence is very much a factor in Indian villages today. It may have gotten better than it used to be, in the sense that the "lower" castes have become better armed and willing to fight back. But that violence has by no means disappeared. It is very likely that the perpetrator of rape in a village has the village policeman in his pocket, and his victim knows that too. If she goes to report that one of the powerful men of the village raped her, the police will do all they can to not file her complaint. Cases of police then raping the woman themselves are not unheard of. In cities, perpetrators are less likely to have that much influence over the local police, and even if they do, the victims are not as clearly aware of it, so they might take the chance to report it. So I don't buy your theory that the percentage of rapes reported is higher in rural areas than it is in urban areas.

trofimov wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:folks in rural areas usually are not afraid of anyone unlike the middle class city dwellers, case in point, groping occurs a lot and is tolerated mostly in the cities. Caste/class related rapes may have been common in the villages a few decades ago but is not the case anymore.

I think caste/class violence is very much a factor in Indian villages today. It may have gotten better than it used to be, in the sense that the "lower" castes have become better armed and willing to fight back. But that violence has by no means disappeared. It is very likely that the perpetrator of rape in a village has the village policeman in his pocket, and his victim knows that too. If she goes to report that one of the powerful men of the village raped her, the police will do all they can to not file her complaint. Cases of police then raping the woman themselves are not unheard of. In cities, perpetrators are less likely to have that much influence over the local police, and even if they do, the victims are not as clearly aware of it, so they might take the chance to report it. So I don't buy your theory that the percentage of rapes reported is higher in rural areas than it is in urban areas.

I didn't know that Kukatpally was a village.

Did you ever consider directing Desi movies?

No guruvu-gaaru, I have absolutely no talent with a video camera. I do want to learn though, hence the sishyarikam.

Guruvu-gaaru is only a camera man. Maybe he is asking the great glut Admin to be his director.

trofimov wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:folks in rural areas usually are not afraid of anyone unlike the middle class city dwellers, case in point, groping occurs a lot and is tolerated mostly in the cities. Caste/class related rapes may have been common in the villages a few decades ago but is not the case anymore.

I think caste/class violence is very much a factor in Indian villages today. It may have gotten better than it used to be, in the sense that the "lower" castes have become better armed and willing to fight back. But that violence has by no means disappeared. It is very likely that the perpetrator of rape in a village has the village policeman in his pocket, and his victim knows that too. If she goes to report that one of the powerful men of the village raped her, the police will do all they can to not file her complaint. Cases of police then raping the woman themselves are not unheard of. In cities, perpetrators are less likely to have that much influence over the local police, and even if they do, the victims are not as clearly aware of it, so they might take the chance to report it. So I don't buy your theory that the percentage of rapes reported is higher in rural areas than it is in urban areas.

Things have changed by quiet a bit, at least in A.P, SC/ST atrocities act has become very powerful and has been used/misused liberally, so knowing your local police won't be much of help, bigger names have been booked under this act; one can't even get by with slapping a low class individual like they used to.

ppl living in cities wont really understand the rape-sexual relations dynamic in small villages. myself and rishi unkil (formerly breast beauty) are forming a panel, a brain trust if you will, on rapes and molestations and will provide consultations and final word to resolve disputes on rape related news items and opinions. all judgements final

confuzzled dude wrote:Things have changed by quiet a bit...

100 times:

Things have changed by quite a bit.

Things have changed by quite a bit.

Things have changed by quite a bit.

......

trofimov wrote:No guruvu-gaaru, I have absolutely no talent with a video camera. I do want to learn though, hence the sishyarikam.

Most village disagreements are harmless (in spite of all the noise and emotion). Reported rapes are also not as common as we see in the movies. Even the clandestine activities that we hear about are uncommon (and rumors are not always substantiated). The average peasant in a village is law abiding, straight forward and well-behaved. He/she doesn't have the opportunities that urbanwallahs have. Even the caste fights you mention are not that common. Villages like Karampudi (with violent episodes) are rare. In my village, I have never seen inter-caste violence. Whatever caste barriers that existed in he past are gradually melting. I am sure this is happening in TN, Karnataka and Kerala. I don't know what the situation is in UP, Bihar, etc.

Jeremiah Mburuburu wrote:

confuzzled dude wrote:Things have changed by quiet a bit...

100 times:

Things have changed by quite a bit.

Things have changed by quite a bit.

Things have changed by quite a bit.

......

Hahaha! good catch. I'm well aware of the meaning (of each) though.

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

trofimov wrote:No guruvu-gaaru, I have absolutely no talent with a video camera. I do want to learn though, hence the sishyarikam.

Most village disagreements are harmless (in spite of all the noise and emotion). Reported rapes are also not as common as we see in the movies. Even the clandestine activities that we hear about are uncommon (and rumors are not always substantiated). The average peasant in a village is law abiding, straight forward and well-behaved. He/she doesn't have the opportunities that urbanwallahs have. Even the caste fights you mention are not that common. Villages like Karampudi (with violent episodes) are rare. In my village, I have never seen inter-caste violence. Whatever caste barriers that existed in he past are gradually melting. I am sure this is happening in TN, Karnataka and Kerala. I don't know what the situation is in UP, Bihar, etc.

Yes, guruvu-gaaru, villages are paradise compared to big bad cities. Let me just tell you what my guruvu-gaaru told me a few days ago:

However, it was uncommon for young girls to report on rapes (for various reasons). To avoid being raped, the working class people got their daughters married off young and most young girls didn't venture out alone.

Another day. Another spell-check. Another dollar.

Another day. A 100 spell-checks. A 100 dollars.

trofimov wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

trofimov wrote:No guruvu-gaaru, I have absolutely no talent with a video camera. I do want to learn though, hence the sishyarikam.

Most village disagreements are harmless (in spite of all the noise and emotion). Reported rapes are also not as common as we see in the movies. Even the clandestine activities that we hear about are uncommon (and rumors are not always substantiated). The average peasant in a village is law abiding, straight forward and well-behaved. He/she doesn't have the opportunities that urbanwallahs have. Even the caste fights you mention are not that common. Villages like Karampudi (with violent episodes) are rare. In my village, I have never seen inter-caste violence. Whatever caste barriers that existed in he past are gradually melting. I am sure this is happening in TN, Karnataka and Kerala. I don't know what the situation is in UP, Bihar, etc.

Yes, guruvu-gaaru, villages are paradise compared to big bad cities. Let me just tell you what my guruvu-gaaru told me a few days ago:

However, it was uncommon for young girls to report on rapes (for various reasons). To avoid being raped, the working class people got their daughters married off young and most young girls didn't venture out alone.

That doesn't mean that rapes are prevalent. Young girls in villages work in the fields and parents marry them off young worrying about them making mistakes (or being targeted by boys) and getting a bad name. Your description of villages is taken from a movie.

trofimov wrote:

Vakavaka Pakapaka wrote:

trofimov wrote:No guruvu-gaaru, I have absolutely no talent with a video camera. I do want to learn though, hence the sishyarikam.

Most village disagreements are harmless (in spite of all the noise and emotion). Reported rapes are also not as common as we see in the movies. Even the clandestine activities that we hear about are uncommon (and rumors are not always substantiated). The average peasant in a village is law abiding, straight forward and well-behaved. He/she doesn't have the opportunities that urbanwallahs have. Even the caste fights you mention are not that common. Villages like Karampudi (with violent episodes) are rare. In my village, I have never seen inter-caste violence. Whatever caste barriers that existed in he past are gradually melting. I am sure this is happening in TN, Karnataka and Kerala. I don't know what the situation is in UP, Bihar, etc.

Yes, guruvu-gaaru, villages are paradise compared to big bad cities. Let me just tell you what my guruvu-gaaru told me a few days ago:

However, it was uncommon for young girls to report on rapes (for various reasons). To avoid being raped, the working class people got their daughters married off young and most young girls didn't venture out alone.

have you ever lived or had any significant contact with villages and the happenings therein? I know it doesn't suit your narrative but based on my experience what guruvu gaaru said is largely true of villages in coastal districts. there are lots of sexual acts that happen and some of them can be coerced but does it mean they're rapes? if you use standard feminist dictionary/manifesto published in berkeley everything in the world is rape one way or the other.

Propagandhi711 wrote:have you ever lived or had any significant contact with villages and the happenings therein?

Yes, I have spent some time in villages in AP and West Bengal. I also visited some villages in Bihar and Odisha for a few days each.

Propagandhi711 wrote:there are lots of sexual acts that happen and some of them can be coerced but does it mean they're rapes?

What is the difference between "coerced" sexual acts and a rape?

trofimov wrote:

Propagandhi711 wrote:have you ever lived or had any significant contact with villages and the happenings therein?

Yes, I have spent some time in villages in AP and West Bengal. I also visited some villages in Bihar and Odisha for a few days each.

Propagandhi711 wrote:there are lots of sexual acts that happen and some of them can be coerced but does it mean they're rapes?

What is the difference between "coerced" sexual acts and a rape?

if someone has sex with a woman promising her a promotion, does it count as rape or coercion?

neither.