I was dumbfounded after having read Patrick Gibbons' letter ("Feminist Tactics Use Fear to Move Agenda," Jan. 20) and its allegations that feminist "nutcases" don't really care about rape, that rape occurs far less frequently than indicated by sexual assault studies, and that women cannot be raped without knowing it.

He goes on to back up these sweeping generalizations with the following intelligent, witty rhetoric: "You're all full of crap and plenty of women see that now." Way to make a convincing argument, Patrick.

I have never spoken with or met Jill Wood, but by Gibbons' own account she is "constantly published on these feminist issues." Therefore, I would expect that the insights that she offers are backed by legitimate research.

As far as the idea that women always know when they are raped, I will just assume that the writer has never heard of date rape drugs like GHB or of rapists getting a person drunk to lower their resistance. It seems to me that, no matter how many women are being raped -- one in three, one in 100, one in 1,000 -- the numbers are still far too high.

Why anyone would accuse feminists of caring only about "increasing their own power" because of their desire to stop the crimes of sexual assault and rape is baffling to me because it doesn't make sense.

If we were talking about people who wanted to bring an end to child abuse, there would be no such accusations.

It's sad to see that a person can graduate from this university despite having failed to learn so much.

For example: how to perform adequate research; how to formulate a reasonable, lucid argument; and how to treat others fairly, equally and with respect.

The time it took to write a letter berating feminists for their stance on sexual assault could have been better spent on any number of endeavors, including the research of rape and sexual assault--a topic that Mr. Gibbons obviously knows little about.