In 2023, Texas had the highest number of forcible rape cases in the United States, with 15,097 reported rapes. Delaware had the lowest number of reported forcible rape cases at 194. Number vs. rate It is perhaps unsurprising that Texas and California reported the highest number of rapes, as these states have the highest population of states in the U.S. When looking at the rape rate, or the number of rapes per 100,000 of the population, a very different picture is painted: Alaska was the state with the highest rape rate in the country in 2023, with California ranking as 30th in the nation. The prevalence of rape Rape and sexual assault are notorious for being underreported crimes, which means that the prevalence of sex crimes is likely much higher than what is reported. Additionally, more than a third of women worry about being sexually assaulted, and most sexual assaults are perpetrated by someone the victim knew.

This study had four key goals. The first goal was to identify how many women in the United States and in college settings have ever been raped or sexually assaulted during their lifetime and within the past year. The next goal was to identify key case characteristics of drug-facilitated and forcible rapes. The third goal was to examine factors that affect the willingness of women to report rape to law enforcement or seek help from their support network. The last goal was to make comparisons between the different types of rape. Part 1 (General Population) data consisted of a national telephone household sample of 3,001 United States women, whereas Part 2 (College Population) data consisted of 2,000 college women selected from a reasonably representative national list of women attending four year colleges and universities. Both data parts contain the same 399 variables. Interviews were completed between January 23 and June 26, 2006. Respondents were asked questions regarding risk perception, fear of violence, and accommodation behavior. The women were also asked their opinions and attitudes about reporting rape to the authorities and disclosing rape to family members, peers, or other individuals. This includes questions about barriers to reporting and experiences that women have had being the recipient of a disclosure from a friend, relative, or other individual. The respondents were asked a series of questions about rape, including different types of forcible, drug- or alcohol-facilitated, and incapacitated rape. For women who endorsed one or more rape experiences, a wide range of rape characteristics were assessed including characteristics around the nature of the event, perpetrator-victim relationship, occurrence of injury, involvement of drugs or alcohol, receipt of medical care, and whether the rape was reported to the authorities. The respondents were also asked a series of questions regarding substance use, including prescription and illegal drugs and alcohol. Additionally, a series of questions related to post-traumatic stress disorder and depression were asked. Finally, the women were asked to provide basic demographic information such as age, race, ethnicity, and income.

The NC Domestic Violence dataset is from https://ncadmin.nc.gov/about-doa/divisions/council-for-women/women-statistics.Here we focus on the datasets corresponding to 2004-2019.The curated datasets are included here along with a research question and guiding questions.See the codebook for full details.

The goal of the study was to develop an intervention that would be analogous to safety planning for battered women, and one that could be used by sexual assault counselors as an adjunct to psychological counseling. The project was conducted at Safe Horizon in New York City and at Harborview Medical Center in Seattle from August 2003 to May 2005. The client populations of the two programs were complementary. Safe Horizon's clients were primarily Black (36 percent) and Latina (26 percent). In contrast, a majority of Harborview clients were White (59 percent), although Harborview also had many non-White, non-Hispanic clients. Approximately half of the eligible candidates were randomly assigned to participate in a four-hour workshop on avoiding sexual assault while the others were assigned to a control condition that did not receive the training. Both groups participated in a baseline assessment battery administered in person. After completion of the assessment, those assigned to the experimental condition began the workshop. Researchers contacted women in both groups six months later for a second assessment, this time conducted over the phone. The 14 data files contain information related to alcohol consumption, tonic immobility, knowledge of sexual assault risk factors, attributions for the most recent sexual assault, self-efficacy, risky behaviors, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD) symptomology, and sexual victimization. The data also contain one file with demographic information. Each data file contains 84 cases. Across all parts, the data collection has 612 variables.

The National Sexual Violence Resource Center (NSVRC) is a national information and resource hub relating to all aspects of sexual violence.

NSVRC staff collect and disseminate a wide range of resources on sexual violence including statistics, research, position statements, statutes, training curricula, prevention initiatives and program information. With these resources, NSVRC assists coalitions, advocates and others interested in understanding and eliminating sexual violence. NSVRC has an active and diverse Advisory Council that assists and advises staff and ensures a broad national perspective. NSVRC also enjoys a strong partnership with state, territory and tribal anti-sexual assault coalitions and allied organizations.

NSVRC is funded through a cooperative agreement from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) Division of Violence Prevention.

This dataset reflects reported incidents of crime (with the exception of murders where data exists for each victim) that occurred in the City of Chicago from 2001 to present, minus the most recent seven days. Data is extracted from the Chicago Police Department's CLEAR (Citizen Law Enforcement Analysis and Reporting) system. In order to protect the privacy of crime victims, addresses are shown at the block level only and specific locations are not identified. Should you have questions about this dataset, you may contact the Research & Development Division of the Chicago Police Department at 312.745.6071 or RandD@chicagopolice.org. Disclaimer: These crimes may be based upon preliminary information supplied to the Police Department by the reporting parties that have not been verified. The preliminary crime classifications may be changed at a later date based upon additional investigation and there is always the possibility of mechanical or human error. Therefore, the Chicago Police Department does not guarantee (either expressed or implied) the accuracy, completeness, timeliness, or correct sequencing of the information and the information should not be used for comparison purposes over time. The Chicago Police Department will not be responsible for any error or omission, or for the use of, or the results obtained from the use of this information. All data visualizations on maps should be considered approximate and attempts to derive specific addresses are strictly prohibited. The Chicago Police Department is not responsible for the content of any off-site pages that are referenced by or that reference this web page other than an official City of Chicago or Chicago Police Department web page. The user specifically acknowledges that the Chicago Police Department is not responsible for any defamatory, offensive, misleading, or illegal conduct of other users, links, or third parties and that the risk of injury from the foregoing rests entirely with the user. The unauthorized use of the words "Chicago Police Department," "Chicago Police," or any colorable imitation of these words or the unauthorized use of the Chicago Police Department logo is unlawful. This web page does not, in any way, authorize such use. Data is updated daily Tuesday through Sunday. The dataset contains more than 65,000 records/rows of data and cannot be viewed in full in Microsoft Excel. Therefore, when downloading the file, select CSV from the Export menu. Open the file in an ASCII text editor, such as Wordpad, to view and search. To access a list of Chicago Police Department - Illinois Uniform Crime Reporting (IUCR) codes, go to http://data.cityofchicago.org/Public-Safety/Chicago-Police-Department-Illinois-Uniform-Crime-R/c7ck-438e

This dataset relates to the number of women aged 18 years and over who experienced sexual violence in the previous 12 months by the relationship to all perpetrators (estimate). Cells in this table have been randomly adjusted to avoid the release of confidential data. Discrepancies may occur between sums of the component items and totals. The definition of 'sexual violence' includes sexual assault and/or sexual threat. 'Cohabiting partner' includes current partner and previous partner. 'Boyfriend/girlfriend/date' relationships may have different levels of commitment and involvement that does not involve living together. For example, this will include persons who have had one date only, regular dating with no sexual involvement, or a serious sexual or emotional relationship. It excludes de facto relationships. This estimate has a relative standard error of 25% to 50% and should be used with caution. 'Other known person' includes all other known persons besides cohabiting partner and boyfriend/girlfriend/date. Components are not able to be added together to produce a total. Where a person has experienced sexual violence by more than one type of perpetrator, they are counted separately for each perpetrator type but are counted only once in the aggregated total. Source: Australian Bureau of Statistics

About Violence Against Women & Girls

The Demographic and Health Surveys (DHS) Program exists to advance the global understanding of health and population trends in developing countries.

The UN describes violence against women and girls (VAWG) as: “One of the most widespread, persistent, and devastating human rights violations in our world today. It remains largely unreported due to the impunity, silence, stigma, and shame surrounding it.”

In general terms, it manifests itself in physical, sexual, and psychological forms, encompassing: • intimate partner violence (battering, psychological abuse, marital rape, femicide) • sexual violence and harassment (rape, forced sexual acts, unwanted sexual advances, child sexual abuse, forced marriage, street harassment, stalking, cyber-harassment), human trafficking (slavery, sexual exploitation) • female genital mutilation • child marriage

About The Data

The data was taken from a survey of men and women in African, Asian, and South American countries, exploring the attitudes and perceived justifications given for committing acts of violence against women. The data also explores different sociodemographic groups that the respondents belong to, including: Education Level, Marital status, Employment, and Age group.

It is, therefore, critical that the countries where these views are widespread, prioritize public awareness campaigns, and access to education for women and girls, to communicate that violence against women and girls is never acceptable or justifiable.

Question | Respondents were asked if they agreed with the following statements: - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she burns the food - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she argues with him - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she goes out without telling him - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she neglects the children - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife if she refuses to have sex with him - A husband is justified in hitting or beating his wife for at least one specific reason

More - Find More Exciting🙀 Datasets Here - An Upvote👍 A Dayᕙ(`▿´)ᕗ , Keeps Aman Hurray Hurray..... ٩(˘◡˘)۶Haha

In the past few years it has become alarmingly clear that women with disabilities are at an extremely high risk for emotional, sexual, and physical assault. The Developmental Disabilities Institute at Wayne State University, in collaboration with the United Cerebral Palsy Association in Michigan, conducted a one-year study to investigate the prevalence and correlates of, and service system capacity related to, domestic abuse among women with physical disabilities in Michigan. The study aimed to address the following research questions: (1) What is the prevalence of domestic violence among a sample of women with physical disabilities? (2) What potential factors for domestic violence exist among women with physical disabilities? and (3) What is the capacity of existing support programs (e.g., safe houses, shelters, and service agencies) to assist women with physical disabilities? The population for this study was women over the age of 18 who had physical disabilities. Consistent with the work of other researchers, physical disabilities in this study were defined as those disabilities that result in functional impairment, such as cerebral palsy, post-polio syndrome, spina bifida, amputation, rheumatic conditions, multiple sclerosis, spinal cord injury, traumatic brain injury, visual impairment, hearing impairment, and stroke. A sample of 177 women was recruited through several mechanisms. To address the question of domestic abuse prevalence, the women participating in the study were first asked to complete a brief questionnaire addressing demographic characteristics and their experience with domestic violence (Part 1, Screening Interview Data). Fifty-six percent (100) of the 177 women interviewed indicated a positive history of abuse at their initial screening. In order to address the second research question about the correlates of abuse, this subsample of 100 women was invited and encouraged to participate in the second phase of the research, which involved a more extensive interview (Part 2, Abuse Interview Data). The interview used was based on a protocol developed by Nosek (1995) that addressed demographic characteristics, social networks, and abuse history. Variables in Parts 1 and 2 include type of disability, type of personal assistance needed, and whether the respondent was ever physically, emotionally, or sexually abused. Part 2 also contains variables on sources of monthly income, who perpetrated the abuse, the abuser's gender, how long the victim knew the abuser, whether the victim sought assistance from a domestic violence program or shelter, and a description of the worst incident of physical abuse. Demographic variables in Parts 1 and 2 include ethnicity, age, employment status, and marital status.

This table contains 48 series, with data for years 1998 - 2000 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years), and is no longer being released. This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 item: Canada); Estimates (2 items: Women;Percent); Reason for admission (24 items: Total admissions;Abusive situations;Physical abuse;Sexual abuse; ...).

Significant differences are denoted in bold italics.

This table contains 48 series, with data for years 1998 - 2000 (not all combinations necessarily have data for all years), and is no longer being released. This table contains data described by the following dimensions (Not all combinations are available): Geography (1 item: Canada); Estimates (2 items: Women;Percent); Reason for admission (24 items: Total admissions;Abusive situations;Physical abuse;Sexual abuse; ...).

Based on data from n = 752 respondents of which 421 women and 331 men (due to missing values).Percentage of the total respondents with sexual abuse, by gender.Total exceeds 100% because multiple answers where possible.Namely: Brazil, Colombia, Egypt (male victim), Indonesia, Iran and Russia.Included: Morocco, Surinam, Dutch Antilles, elsewhere non-western.