Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!samsung!usc!orion.oac.uci.edu!ucivax!gateway
From: jym@mica.berkeley.edu (Jym Dyer)
Newsgroups: soc.feminism
Subject: Re: Uproar over challenge to campus date-rape study
Message-ID: <JYM.91Jun22185244@remarque.berkeley.edu>
Date: 24 Jun 91 17:02:46 GMT
References: <1991May31.195050.12567@netcom.COM>
Organization: The Naughty Peahen Party Line
Lines: 15
Approved: tittle@ics.uci.edu
Nntp-Posting-Host: alexandre-dumas.ics.uci.edu

> virtually none of those who are objecting to it seem, at least
> so far, to be willing to step up to the author's premise: that
> the original study is flawed, was designed with a particular
> agenda in mind, and is therefore not "good science."

    If you're talking about the Gilbert article, I find your
complaint hard to accept.  Gilbert provides no research of
his own, nothing to actually challenge the other studies.
He just suggests they're wrong and speculates why they are.

    I don't particularly see this as something to "step up" to.
If Gilbert had provided a shred of data, it might be different.
As it stands, the article is no better than any political
diatribe.
    <_Jym_>