By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - General Discussion - ‘Rape Culture’ Is A MYTH | Change My Mind

Torillian on 08 October 2018
Qwark said:
setsunatenshi said:

I agree same rights should be given to all humans. So if you take it to the logical conclusion, the woman is able to sustain her life without sucking it out of the potential child. The potential child, on the other hand, is not able to sustain itself without literally leaching life out of the woman that carries it, therefore the right of the woman to self determine what sucks the life out of her body is 100 times out of 100 the most important right to uphold. You literally can't force someone to hurt their own body to sustain another. If that was the case you would make it that a court could order you to donate a kidney if that could save another human's life. No one makes that argument because it's obviously absurd, so how can it be valid for the anti choice crowd? 

 

We don't even need to get to the point that 1 of those beings is actually conscient, thinking and able to make decisions, while the other is literally not existing as a person yet. 

Not voluntarily giving up a kidney and willingly killing a consious human being because its inconvenient are not even remotely the same. As for leaching the life out of someone. You do realise the female body is biologically designed to carry a child. It normally doesn't cause inreparable medical damage to a woman. Unlike abortion which is definitive.

You can't give someone the right to kill another human being once its consious. Unless said person chooses so. If you don't want to raise a child totally fine, plenty of people who. would want to adopt a child. Luckily where I live abortion after 22 weeks is actually forbidden by law. Since even if the woman wants to get rid of it the medical procedure is forbidden to execute by a doctor, unless there are very compelling nefical reasons. Although I guess you could cut it out after that periode and lay it in a couveuse. 

A foetus is an exsisting person just because it is in a womb and you can not see it doesn't mean it is non existant. A consious foetus is a lot more than just a bunch of cell that are building a person. A featus is in fact a developing human being and that person has the right not to be killed. The fact that you would regard a consious festus as a parasite and something that has no value at all, is pretty disturbing if you ask me. 

 

you're missing the point. If someone had failed/failing kidneys, do you think the government could conscript someone to put that person on dialysis until a donor came around? Because the person with kidney issues is certainly a conscious human being, but I think most would say that the government should not be able to force someone to take that burden on their body even if it's for the betterment of another. 



...

Around the Network
eva01beserk on 08 October 2018
SpokenTruth said:
LudicrousSpeed said:
It’s a myth in the US at least. We look down on rapists and prosecute them. There’s nothing cultural here that results in us encouraging or ignoring rapists.

You can blame the #metoo movement for a majority of the doubt and negativity surrounding accusers nowadays. Look at the Aziz situation, a woman went out with him, engaged willingly in a sexual encounter, never once said no or removed herself from the situation, and then later accused him of sexual assault for basically not being able to read her mind. You have a bad hookup and it’s sexual assault. It’s dumb.

Unfortunately it’s a hard crime to prove and a lot of the time it happens under dubious circumstances like drinking, parties, etc. It’s not something like theft or assault.

The Aziz situation became nothing.  His career was not impacted nor was he charged with anything. 

eva01beserk said:

Almost all your articles link to the same study that got debunked a million times. A study with a tiny sample size of self register subjects. That in itself is critized because obiously thouse afected will be more inclined to participate.

The second point that is heavily critized is what they deem sexual assault. They include if a woman regrets it the next day for whatever reason. They include a unwanted sexual advancement even if it lead to nothing. and basicly if the woman "feels" asaulted.

And the last thing this study is heavily criticized is the idea that 95% of victims dont come foward, wich comes out their ass. While yes, its true that some assaults go unreported for the reasons they mentioned, they show no reason at all to asume its 95% unreported. 

So after the real number gets inflated like crazzy by them saying that any little thing that makes a girl unconfortable sexual assault, then they multiply the number by 20 to make up the 95% unreported and then you get your 1 in 5. Wich is total nonsense. 

And this is not by me, this report got riped apart a thousand times by real academics.

Look at this short video from a real academic whos a woman and a feminist.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lNsJ1DhqQ-s 

 

And finally stop with the straw man. At no point anybody claimed anything about false acusation being the same rate as assaults.

This proves you didn't read the links at all.  You posted a retort video regarding a CDC document.   Here is the video description.

"Sexual assault is a terrible problem that America must solve. The CDC claims that 1-in-5 women in the US will be a victim of rape in their lifetime, a substantially different figure than Department of Justice crime statistics. Christina Sommers says that the CDC's exaggerated numbers get in the way of genuine solutions to the problem, and calls for accurate data and real solutions to help end the scourge of sexual violence."

But if you look at the stats from those links I gave, every damn one of them uses the Department of Justice Crime Statistics save for those were campus surveys.

So you're knocking the very statistics you are claiming I should be following.  Or are you now going to saw the Department of Justice is wrong too?

 

I really think you just close your ears and hume while hearing an oposing arguent. Its a 4 min video theres no way your attention span is that bad.

The very thing she points out in the video where they get that number. Starts at 1.10. SHe says that the  justice department crime survey reported 188k sexual assault cases on 2010 and the cdc then report over one million. All coming from that stupid survey I mentioned before. And that 1.3 million then gets blown even more when they included pretty much any misconfont into sexual assault making it over 13 million.

Again, its a 4 min video, watch it again with an open mind.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

eva01beserk on 08 October 2018
sundin13 said:
eva01beserk said:

Almost all your articles link to the same study that got debunked a million times. A study with a tiny sample size of self register subjects. That in itself is critized because obiously thouse afected will be more inclined to participate.

The second point that is heavily critized is what they deem sexual assault. They include if a woman regrets it the next day for whatever reason. They include a unwanted sexual advancement even if it lead to nothing. and basicly if the woman "feels" asaulted.

And the last thing this study is heavily criticized is the idea that 95% of victims dont come foward, wich comes out their ass. While yes, its true that some assaults go unreported for the reasons they mentioned, they show no reason at all to asume its 95% unreported. 

So after the real number gets inflated like crazzy by them saying that any little thing that makes a girl unconfortable sexual assault, then they multiply the number by 20 to make up the 95% unreported and then you get your 1 in 5. Wich is total nonsense.

If you are curious, the BJS suggests that there were about 325,000 instances of rape or sexual assault in 2016 (including only individuals over 12 in that statistic), with about 20% of those being reported to the police.

While these numbers are clearly less than the NISVS numbers, I'm not really sure if that says much about whether we live in a "rape culture" because the definition of rape culture is vague and subjective. In my personal opinion, those numbers are still high enough that I would consider sexual violence to be a major issue in the United States.

I belive 1 rape is still to many. But thats not the issue. They are making things worst by exagerating everything and due to that women are in a state of panic basicly making them distrust men and afecting families.

But I also repeat. that unreported statistic is based on nothing. While its ovbiously true that a lot of cases go unreported, to belive is that high that would make 1 in 5 women have been asaulted is just lunacy. 



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

sundin13 on 08 October 2018
eva01beserk said:
sundin13 said:

If you are curious, the BJS suggests that there were about 325,000 instances of rape or sexual assault in 2016 (including only individuals over 12 in that statistic), with about 20% of those being reported to the police.

While these numbers are clearly less than the NISVS numbers, I'm not really sure if that says much about whether we live in a "rape culture" because the definition of rape culture is vague and subjective. In my personal opinion, those numbers are still high enough that I would consider sexual violence to be a major issue in the United States.

I belive 1 rape is still to many. But thats not the issue. They are making things worst by exagerating everything and due to that women are in a state of panic basicly making them distrust men and afecting families.

But I also repeat. that unreported statistic is based on nothing. While its ovbiously true that a lot of cases go unreported, to belive is that high that would make 1 in 5 women have been asaulted is just lunacy. 

Numbers which indicate what percentage of crimes are not reported to the police are not "based on nothing". BJS has a National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which I believe was referred to as the "gold standard" in your video source. This survey utilizes different methods than the UCR reports. UCR gets data from the police to determine how many crimes were handled in any given year. NCVS gets data from individuals to determine how many victimizations occurred in any given year. This data includes information on whether or not each victimization is reported to the police.

Second, I believe you are misconstruing the argument you have been presented. Not all of the links that you were presented utilized NISVS data. The first link seems to partially use it, but beyond that, it doesn't seem like that specific survey is really utilized much in those links. Some link to various things which cannot be fact checked (a book or an educational video), but by and large, criticizing that one survey does not respond to the point that is being made.

To address the original claim:

"Everybody knows one woman who has been the victim of sexual assault or rape." While obviously the claim is not literally true, we can look into whether it is statistically true.

The rate of sexual assault or rape is about 1/1000/year (Worth noting that this is a vast under-estimate. The numbers for the last few years have been around 1.1-1.6, and these numbers have drastically dropped over the last 30 years). The average person knows 600 people, therefore using the most simple math, the average person knows 0.6 people who are sexually assaulted or raped every year. Assuming the average lifespan is 70 and there are zero victimizations in the first 12 years of someones life (as the stats don't include individuals under 12), the average person would know 34 people who were victims of sexual assault or rape over their lifetime.

That is actually a lot higher than I was expecting. Is my math wrong somewhere?



eva01beserk on 08 October 2018
sundin13 said:
eva01beserk said:

I belive 1 rape is still to many. But thats not the issue. They are making things worst by exagerating everything and due to that women are in a state of panic basicly making them distrust men and afecting families.

But I also repeat. that unreported statistic is based on nothing. While its ovbiously true that a lot of cases go unreported, to belive is that high that would make 1 in 5 women have been asaulted is just lunacy. 

Numbers which indicate what percentage of crimes are not reported to the police are not "based on nothing". BJS has a National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which I believe was referred to as the "gold standard" in your video source. This survey utilizes different methods than the UCR reports. UCR gets data from the police to determine how many crimes were handled in any given year. NCVS gets data from individuals to determine how many victimizations occurred in any given year. This data includes information on whether or not each victimization is reported to the police.

Second, I believe you are misconstruing the argument you have been presented. Not all of the links that you were presented utilized NISVS data. The first link seems to partially use it, but beyond that, it doesn't seem like that specific survey is really utilized much in those links. Some link to various things which cannot be fact checked (a book or an educational video), but by and large, criticizing that one survey does not respond to the point that is being made.

To address the original claim:

"Everybody knows one woman who has been the victim of sexual assault or rape." While obviously the claim is not literally true, we can look into whether it is statistically true.

The rate of sexual assault or rape is about 1/1000/year (Worth noting that this is a vast under-estimate. The numbers for the last few years have been around 1.1-1.6, and these numbers have drastically dropped over the last 30 years). The average person knows 600 people, therefore using the most simple math, the average person knows 0.6 people who are sexually assaulted or raped every year. Assuming the average lifespan is 70 and there are zero victimizations in the first 12 years of someones life (as the stats don't include individuals under 12), the average person would know 34 people who were victims of sexual assault or rape over their lifetime.

That is actually a lot higher than I was expecting. Is my math wrong somewhere?

Ok as long as you dont asume that 1 is 5 myth, were good. While I still believe 1 in 1000 is still to unrealistic high, that is something I am confortable using in a hypothetical argument. 

Ok now we are back at square one. How do they know they go unreported? If you go asking person by person if they where asaulted in anyway and they claim yes, but it was not reported to the police, then it still dosent mean much. You cant tell if it was true or false. Cuz again most acounts of asault now days are based on feelings. The most you can count is the 20% as actual numbers, then say theres another 4x as many women who "probably" where asaulted. Wich will bring the number down. Again, we canot asume anybody that just makes a claim is telling the truth.

I have a problem with your math. In what world do you meet 600 people per year? Im 28 and dont think I can name 100 people of the top of my head. If you were to say 600 in a life I would say maybe, but 34k if you start after 12? SO no, you are still way off.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

Around the Network
sundin13 on 08 October 2018
eva01beserk said:
sundin13 said:

Numbers which indicate what percentage of crimes are not reported to the police are not "based on nothing". BJS has a National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which I believe was referred to as the "gold standard" in your video source. This survey utilizes different methods than the UCR reports. UCR gets data from the police to determine how many crimes were handled in any given year. NCVS gets data from individuals to determine how many victimizations occurred in any given year. This data includes information on whether or not each victimization is reported to the police.

Second, I believe you are misconstruing the argument you have been presented. Not all of the links that you were presented utilized NISVS data. The first link seems to partially use it, but beyond that, it doesn't seem like that specific survey is really utilized much in those links. Some link to various things which cannot be fact checked (a book or an educational video), but by and large, criticizing that one survey does not respond to the point that is being made.

To address the original claim:

"Everybody knows one woman who has been the victim of sexual assault or rape." While obviously the claim is not literally true, we can look into whether it is statistically true.

The rate of sexual assault or rape is about 1/1000/year (Worth noting that this is a vast under-estimate. The numbers for the last few years have been around 1.1-1.6, and these numbers have drastically dropped over the last 30 years). The average person knows 600 people, therefore using the most simple math, the average person knows 0.6 people who are sexually assaulted or raped every year. Assuming the average lifespan is 70 and there are zero victimizations in the first 12 years of someones life (as the stats don't include individuals under 12), the average person would know 34 people who were victims of sexual assault or rape over their lifetime.

That is actually a lot higher than I was expecting. Is my math wrong somewhere?

Ok as long as you dont asume that 1 is 5 myth, were good. While I still believe 1 in 1000 is still to unrealistic high, that is something I am confortable using in a hypothetical argument. 

Ok now we are back at square one. How do they know they go unreported? If you go asking person by person if they where asaulted in anyway and they claim yes, but it was not reported to the police, then it still dosent mean much. You cant tell if it was true or false. Cuz again most acounts of asault now days are based on feelings. The most you can count is the 20% as actual numbers, then say theres another 4x as many women who "probably" where asaulted. Wich will bring the number down. Again, we canot asume anybody that just makes a claim is telling the truth.

I have a problem with your math. In what world do you meet 600 people per year? Im 28 and dont think I can name 100 people of the top of my head. If you were to say 600 in a life I would say maybe, but 34k if you start after 12? SO no, you are still way off.

First of all, the 1 in 5 vs 1 in 1000 statistics are fundamentally different. 1 in 5 is over a lifetime and 1 in 1000 is per year. Also, 1 in 5 I believe refers to females only which further inflates the numbers because females are disproportionately victims of sexual violence. If you multiply the 1 in 1000 figure by the average lifespan, it turns into 1 in 12ish and if you account for females only, it would probably shrink to maybe 1 in 8, but that is just a guess (and I'm not sure how valid simple multiplication would be to convert yearly figures to lifetime figures). Basically, don't compare the two numbers.

Second, the whole middle part of your argument is fairly ridiculous. You assert that a survey which your own source refers to as a "gold standard" and is considered to be one of the best measures we have of crime figures is wrong because 80% of reports are false. That is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous. There is no reason to believe in a widespread epidemic of people lying to anonymous BJS surveys. You will have to validate that claim in order to assert that it actually holds any statistical weight. I see no reason to entertain that notion further without any actual non-anecdotal proof.

Third, I never said you meet 600 people per year. I said that the average person knows 600 people. This number came from a paper out of Columbia which sought to answer the question of how many people does the average person know (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3666355/). It is the most robust answer I am aware of. I do not consider this to be an error in my math.

If that is the only issue you take with my math, I will consider the estimate of 34 accurate.



eva01beserk on 08 October 2018
sundin13 said:
eva01beserk said:

Ok as long as you dont asume that 1 is 5 myth, were good. While I still believe 1 in 1000 is still to unrealistic high, that is something I am confortable using in a hypothetical argument. 

Ok now we are back at square one. How do they know they go unreported? If you go asking person by person if they where asaulted in anyway and they claim yes, but it was not reported to the police, then it still dosent mean much. You cant tell if it was true or false. Cuz again most acounts of asault now days are based on feelings. The most you can count is the 20% as actual numbers, then say theres another 4x as many women who "probably" where asaulted. Wich will bring the number down. Again, we canot asume anybody that just makes a claim is telling the truth.

I have a problem with your math. In what world do you meet 600 people per year? Im 28 and dont think I can name 100 people of the top of my head. If you were to say 600 in a life I would say maybe, but 34k if you start after 12? SO no, you are still way off.

First of all, the 1 in 5 vs 1 in 1000 statistics are fundamentally different. 1 in 5 is over a lifetime and 1 in 1000 is per year. Also, 1 in 5 I believe refers to females only which further inflates the numbers because females are disproportionately victims of sexual violence. If you multiply the 1 in 1000 figure by the average lifespan, it turns into 1 in 12ish and if you account for females only, it would probably shrink to maybe 1 in 8, but that is just a guess (and I'm not sure how valid simple multiplication would be to convert yearly figures to lifetime figures). Basically, don't compare the two numbers.

Second, the whole middle part of your argument is fairly ridiculous. You assert that a survey which your own source refers to as a "gold standard" and is considered to be one of the best measures we have of crime figures is wrong because 80% of reports are false. That is ridiculous. Patently ridiculous. There is no reason to believe in a widespread epidemic of people lying to anonymous BJS surveys. You will have to validate that claim in order to assert that it actually holds any statistical weight. I see no reason to entertain that notion further without any actual non-anecdotal proof.

Third, I never said you meet 600 people per year. I said that the average person knows 600 people. This number came from a paper out of Columbia which sought to answer the question of how many people does the average person know (https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3666355/). It is the most robust answer I am aware of. I do not consider this to be an error in my math.

If that is the only issue you take with my math, I will consider the estimate of 34 accurate.

If thouse 2 numbers where the same all along just one over a life time the other over a year then just multiply it wont work. I dont know either how to get the real number, but I can be sure its not as high as high as 1 in 5 or even 12.  

When the hell did I clam that unreported means false? Straw man much? Dont make up things I said please. I said very clearly that the way they get the unreported figures is all based on asuption. A  survey with no investigation means nothing and Im just saying that number should not be added toghether to the actual reported cases. just gime a reprted cases number and an unreported cases number. I will be happy to use that reported number even if its a wrong cuz it will be closer to the real number. And yes, the video claims its the best source we got. It never claimed or me, that is 100% acurate. I even stated before that i dont belive is still so high but im willing to use it just to play your game.

Never claimed you math is off. Its something a kid can do. My issue is with the statistics you are using. For that 34 to be acurate, you would have to asume that ridiculous high rate of assault. 

Im not sure where I saw it, but something like 80% off sexual assault cases come from university. and that the majority of thouse cases are things that would not be consider an assault 20 years ago. Dont quote me on this cuz Im trying to remember and might be completly wrong, but seems like a certain group who claim this, so it might be concntrated in certain areas(university/big citys). SO that number squews things off. While it wont change the number total, it could change the areas as where 80% of this might happen. So if your not around or the people you know there is a chance you will not meet any of theese victims. That probably means nothing but just a crazzy thought, if what I remember is correct.



It takes genuine talent to see greatness in yourself despite your absence of genuine talent.

KLAMarine on 08 October 2018
SpokenTruth said:
KLAMarine said:

I like to think I proposed a number 26.

I'm sure you (plural) do but my question is "are false rape accusations a part of rape culture?"

Yes but not sure how it's relevant...

No.

Your 26 is covered by 21.

I disagree. 21 seems more concerned with belief that the majority of sex assault cases are false. My concern is different: that there may be a tendency to believe an allegation with no evidence to show for it.

SpokenTruth said:

False accusations are a fraction of actual assaults. 

So they should be disregarded? They can be very damning and even life-threatening.



sundin13 on 08 October 2018
eva01beserk said:

1) If thouse 2 numbers where the same all along just one over a life time the other over a year then just multiply it wont work. I dont know either how to get the real number, but I can be sure its not as high as high as 1 in 5 or even 12.  

2) When the hell did I clam that unreported means false? Straw man much? Dont make up things I said please. I said very clearly that the way they get the unreported figures is all based on asuption. A  survey with no investigation means nothing and Im just saying that number should not be added toghether to the actual reported cases. just gime a reprted cases number and an unreported cases number. I will be happy to use that reported number even if its a wrong cuz it will be closer to the real number. And yes, the video claims its the best source we got. It never claimed or me, that is 100% acurate. I even stated before that i dont belive is still so high but im willing to use it just to play your game.

3) Never claimed you math is off. Its something a kid can do. My issue is with the statistics you are using. For that 34 to be acurate, you would have to asume that ridiculous high rate of assault. 

4) Im not sure where I saw it, but something like 80% off sexual assault cases come from university. and that the majority of thouse cases are things that would not be consider an assault 20 years ago. Dont quote me on this cuz Im trying to remember and might be completly wrong, but seems like a certain group who claim this, so it might be concntrated in certain areas(university/big citys). SO that number squews things off. While it wont change the number total, it could change the areas as where 80% of this might happen. So if your not around or the people you know there is a chance you will not meet any of theese victims. That probably means nothing but just a crazzy thought, if what I remember is correct.

1) Do you have anything to back that up? It seems to me that your argument has largely become "I feel like that doesn't seem right, so it must be wrong", which honestly isn't much of an argument.

2) Just ignoring the fact that sexual violence is often unreported and pretending that those crimes didn't exist does not make your numbers any more accurate. You are ignoring the prevailing body of knowledge and literally everything we know about crime reporting which states that rape is widely under-reported, in order to twist the numbers to somewhat agree with you. Ignoring the majority of sexual violence does not make anything more accurate. While there may be some small portion of false reports in BJS statistics, there is no reason to assume that these outnumber cases which are unreported in BJS statistics or cases that occur before an individual turns 12, or even that these are statistically significant. If anything, these numbers provided by the NCVS are likely to be an underestimate, not an overestimate. To argue that we cannot use the best data we have is to argue that we should not be having this conversation because any alternative you present will be worse. Unless you have a more comprehensive estimate (using only reported crimes is less comprehensive, not more comprehensive), you are not adding to this discussion.

3) So, for my math to be correct, you have to assume that the best estimate available is accurate. I don't consider this to be an issue here...

4) Yes, there are high risk populations, but that doesn't really change anything. We are talking about the average person here. That means that some people will know more individuals who have been victimized and some will know less. Still, the number here is so high that such variation does little to really change the point.



o_O.Q on 08 October 2018
Tulipanzo said:
To ignore just how prevalent behaviour that encourages or justifies rape is in American society you have to be ignorant, cruel or both.
As such, this guy is talking shit and isn't worth watching. - CHANGE MY MIND

lol examples?