Outrage over "Don't be that girl" Posters in Edmonton.

[igualitarist]

What data leads you to think that number is incorrect?

Mostly common sense, i am not looking for any kind of data here, but the methodology of the CDC study disgusted me.

By using the logic, we can deduce that if 1/4 of the women will experience rape in their lifetimes, there needs to be a huge proportion of male rapists among the male population. I just think this is bizarre. Come on, i live in a third world country and only once a rape case happened in my "social circle", and i grew up in a poor neighborhood. Every man i know totaly despises rape, and i mostly see it happening in television and in newspapers.

[Deleted]

Uh, yeah, nobody said that.
What they -did- say was that people shouldn't wave off false-positives of rape-claims as "never happens" (like you seem to be trying to), because it's definitely a thing that happens often enough for it to be a concern.

I provided numbers for it earlier in the thread. It's 2-3% according to what I provided. You just seem to be willfully ignoring that.

[Wells]

Mostly common sense, i am not looking for any kind of data here, but the methodology of the CDC study disgusted me.

By using the logic, we can deduce that if 1/4 of the women will experience rape in their lifetimes, there needs to be a huge proportion of male rapists among the male population. I just think this is bizarre. Come on, i live in a third world country and only once a rape case happened in my "social circle", and i grew up in a poor neighborhood. Everyone i man i know totaly despises rape, and i mostly see it happening in television and newspapers.

Dismissing studies because of "common sense" should be criminal

[Soki]

I provided numbers for it earlier in the thread. It's 2-3% according to what I provided. You just seem to be willfully ignoring that.

So that 2-3% doesn't matter to you?
It's enough to not even enter your spectrum of concern?

That 2-3% is like the 2-3% chance that a condom could break and cause an unwanted pregnancy. The concern is legitimate one for a man who's out having a good time and is talking to a teasy, hottly-dressed lady.

The fact that you're waving it by is pretty telling, I have to say.

I haven't done anything hypocritical.

Do you think perhaps your personal history is coloring your perception here?

Maybe you should try to divorce your personal history from your views regarding women and rape

Then:

You know, it's funny - with the poster you quoted, you bring up that their personal experience colored their perception - yet with a poster like Tiili, you're fine with letting that slide.

Do you see the irony there?
When a person whose view may be skewed from their own bad experience holds an opinion that's congruent with that experience, but they hold the same view as you, it's fine to not mention it, right?

Maybe you just didn't read Tiili's posts - but it happens all the time with this sort of discussion - where one party calls out the other, but doesn't call out their own party on the bullshit they do.

And finally:

So when someone points out that you're doing in your post exactly what you're attacking the post you quoted for doing your answer is "no u".

So basically, my response to you calling me a hypocrite is less "no u"; and more "No, I'm not. I don't think you know what that word means - but you certainly use it a lot -and certainly are one".

[MathAddict]

Dismissing studies because of "common sense" should be criminal

Then you would have to arrest much of the scientific community. Many studies are not worth the paper they are printed on. Everyone should be critical of studies, statistics, and assertions backed by data. If people did not scrutinize and reject bad studies.... well I don't even want to imagine what kind of world we would live in.

[Wells]

Then you would have to arrest much of the scientific community. Many studies are not worth the paper they are printed on. Everyone should be critical of studies, statistics, and assertions backed by data. If people did not scrutinize and reject bad studies.... well I don't even want to imagine what kind of world we would live in.

Being critical of scientific data because you don't like it isn't rationality its just being aggressively ignorant.

You need a methodology problem in order to discount the data. Or at least competing data. You're just saying its wrong because you say its wrong.

[Deleted]

What data leads you to think that number is incorrect?

Link: http://articles.washingtonpost.com/2...e-assaults-cdc
This: The researchers freely admit that they are not using the FBI or any state’s definition of rape
and This: The agency’s figures are wildly at odds with official crime statistics. The FBI found that 84,767 rapes were reported to law enforcement authorities in 2010. The Bureau of Justice Statistics’ National Crime Victimization Survey, the gold standard in crime research, reports 188,380 rapes and sexual assaults on females and males in 2010. Granted, not all assaults are reported to authorities. But where did the CDC find 13.7 million victims of sexual crimes that the professional criminologists had overlooked?
It found them by defining sexual violence in impossibly elastic ways and then letting the surveyors, rather than subjects, determine what counted as an assault. Consider: In a telephone survey with a 30 percent response rate, interviewers did not ask participants whether they had been raped. Instead of such straightforward questions, the CDC researchers described a series of sexual encounters and then they determined whether the responses indicated sexual violation. A sample of 9,086 women was asked, for example, “When you were drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent, how many people ever had vaginal sex with you?” A majority of the 1.3 million women (61.5 percent) the CDC projected as rape victims in 2010 experienced this sort of “alcohol or drug facilitated penetration.”

[Soki]

It's less of an issue than unreported rapes are. If unreported rapes suddenly were 100% reported false accusations would be close to non-existant statistically with reported rapes.

Uh-huh..
So you -are- waving the problem off?

[Deleted]

Uh-huh..
So you -are- waving the problem off?

No, I'm saying there is no real actual statistical problem with it. Had it been 10-20%, then, yes. Now? No. It's less false accusations reports in rapes than there are in other types of crimes - reporting false theft of your car is more common than false accusations of rape.

[Wells]

So let me get this straight soki. I can only say someone is making too broad a generalization if I go through a 60 page thread and find every instance of someone doing that and call them all out on that.

Well thanks for making it clear how worthwhile you are.

[MathAddict]

Being critical of scientific data because you don't like it isn't rationality its just being aggressively ignorant.

You need a methodology problem in order to discount the data. Or at least competing data. You're just saying its wrong because you say its wrong.

I never said anything is wrong, only statements such as "discounting studies because of common sense should be criminal" are wrong. You can look at a study and discount it with common sense for a blatant error.

The study provided above that concludes 1/4 women will be raped in their lifetime is a great example of a study that can be discounted due to common sense. If a study came out saying 1/2 men loved male on male relations, we could easily discount that with common sense. The obvious problem with the rape study was the scope of the survey. If you cast a survey such that some questions fall into a grey or ambiguous area, then read that as a positive for rape, the conclusion is much less meaningful and may be disregarded.

[Moadar]

You're overblowing a non-issue out of proportions.

There are thousands of rapes happening for each false accusation, you are waving those rapists off by tunneling on false accusations.

If its true that the study with the 2-3% being thrown around counts regretting a one night stand as sexual assault then that study is bullshit.

[Wells]

I never said anything is wrong, only statements such as "discounting studies because of common sense should be criminal" are wrong. You can look at a study and discount it with common sense for a blatant error.

The study provided above that concludes 1/4 women will be raped in their lifetime is a great example of a study that can be discounted due to common sense. If a study came out saying 1/2 men loved male on male relations, we could easily discount that with common sense. The obvious problem with the rape study was the scope of the survey. If you cast a survey such that some questions fall into a grey or ambiguous area, the conclusion is much less meaningful and may be disregarded.

I'm really not interested in you rehashing the same crap again. You discounted a scientific study with no data or methodology complaint. Your criticism is meaningless.

[TheImmortalLordAtlas]

Irrelevant. That's because the FBI's definition of rape is worthless, so is many states'. Unless you can actually show that there's a problem with the definition they did use, you're still going "I don't like fact so I'm going to pretend its made up".

- - - Updated - - -


That's not what anyone has done. All you lot are doing is assuming a study is wrong without even looking at it.

Why are you randomly discrediting the FBI because you don't like their definition?...

[MathAddict]

Irrelevant. That's because the FBI's definition of rape is worthless, so is many states'. Unless you can actually show that there's a problem with the definition they did use, you're still going "I don't like fact so I'm going to pretend its made up".

- - - Updated - - -


That's not what anyone has done. All you lot are doing is assuming a study is wrong without even looking at it.

Go look at what I originally quested. Wells did say "discounting studies because of common sense should be criminal." That point addressed someone else disregarding a study. Studies are disregarded every day by merely looking at the method and seeing a blatant error.

[MathAddict]

I'm really not interested in you rehashing the same crap again. You discounted a scientific study with no data or methodology complaint. Your criticism is meaningless.

Please read my post...

If you cast a survey such that some questions fall into a grey or ambiguous area, the conclusion is much less meaningful and may be disregarded.

[igualitarist]

Dismissing studies because of "common sense" should be criminal

I am glad you are not a lawmaker !

Right, because science is infallible, right ?
No one ever used a flawed/biased methodology, right ?

Also, i said that the methodology of this study disgusted me, so it was not only common sense. And argued that using common sense and logic, we can deduce that the percentage of rapists among male population should be huge to match this number that points that 1/4 of the women will experience rape in their lifetime. And this makes no sense, theres nothing to prove the proportion of rapists in the male population is so huge. So this study spreads the misandy, by using a flawed and biased methodology.

So many sophists and demagogues here, i am baffled.

[Wells]

Go look at what I originally quested. Wells did say "discounting studies because of common sense should be criminal." That point addressed someone else disregarding a study. Studies are disregarded every day by merely looking at the method and seeing a blatant error.

He didn't present a methodology error. He just declared the data invalid.

[Soki]

So let me get this straight soki. I can only say someone is making too broad a generalization if I go through a 60 page thread and find every instance of someone doing that and call them all out on that.

Well thanks for making it clear how worthwhile you are.

That's a little harsh.
I hadn't realized how much this thread grew overnight.

You're overblowing a non-issue out of proportions.

There are thousands of rapes happening for each false accusation, you are waving those rapists off by tunneling on false accusations.

No, I'm saying there is no real actual statistical problem with it. Had it been 10-20%, then, yes. Now? No. It's less false accusations reports in rapes than there are in other types of crimes - reporting false theft of your car is more common than false accusations of rape.

I wouldn't say it's a non-issue like you are.
I also never said rape isn't an issue.
What's happening here is that I'm getting piled on for thinking that "it BARELY happens!" isn't a passable reason to wave off the other side of the table.

As an aside, I don't think anybody has ever said "Rape isn't a problem" in recent years. Don't fall back to that. Strawmen get torched pretty quickly.

[TheImmortalLordAtlas]

There's nothing random about discounting an archaic definition that everyone agreeded is oudated. The FBI used an archane definition that they themselves decided needed to be changed.

Obviously not everyone...