AMIR'S RESEARCH IS METHODOLOGICALLY WEAK BECAUSE IT RELIES ON OFFICIAL POLICE DATA, THAT HAS A LOW-RATE OF REPORTABILITY, TO ANALYZE THE DEGREE OF RESISTANCE BY THE FEMALE VICTIM DURING THE RAPE ATTACK. THE LOW REPORTING RATE IS PARTIALLY ACCOUNTED FOR BY FEAR OF SOCIAL STIGMATIZATION. A SECOND METHODOLOGICAL WEAKNESS IS THE MANY DIFFERENCES IN RECORDING OBJECTIVITY AND CRIME CLASSIFICATION AMONG POLICE DEPARTMENTS. ALSO, THE STUDY'S DEFINITION OF 'VICTIM PRECIPITATION' IS SO VAGUE THAT ACCURATE REPLICATION OR VERIFICATION OF THE STUDY'S FINDINGS IS DIFFICULT. THIS IS ILLUSTRATED BY THE DISPARATE PERCENTAGES OF VICTIM PRECIPITATION OBTAINED FOR THE SAME DATA IN ANOTHER STUDY WHICH USED THE IDENTICAL DEFINITION OF VICTIM PRECIPITATION. THE MUCH HIGHER RATE OF VICTIM PRECIPITATION ASSIGNED IN THE ORIGINAL RESEARCH PRESENTS THE VICTIM WITH A CONSIDERABLE ROLE IN THE CAUSATION OF RAPE. FINALLY, BY INVOKING A CAUSAL FACTOR DESCRIBED AS 'BAD REPUTATION,' IT IS INFERRED THAT JUSTIFICATION FOR COMPLAINT BY SOME RAPE VICTIMS IS LESS JUSTIFIED. ATTEMPTS TO SHIFT SOME OF THE BLAME TO THE VICTIM OF RAPE MAY BE A MEANS OF FRUSTRATING INCREASED FEMININE ASSERTIVENESS FOR EQUAL RIGHTS. THE BURDEN FOR MAINTAINING SOCIAL NORMS IN REGARD TO RAPE REMAINS WITH THE WOMAN. FOR EXAMPLE, IT IS ASSUMED THAT A MALE CAN HITCHHIKE WITH IMPUNITY, BUT THE REVERSE PRIVILEGE IS NOT EXTENDED TO FEMALES. HOWEVER, MEMBERS OF THE JUDICIARY WHO ADMONISH FEMALES FOR CERTAIN BEHAVIOR WHICH WOULD NOT BE REGARDED AS REPREHENSIBLE IF COMMITTED BY MALES, PERPETUATE A SYSTEM OF DUAL MORALITY AND DISCRIMINATION. (DEG)