Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Mar 2010
- Posts
- 5,038
Jimmy Savile - Sexual Predator
- Thread starter fidget
- Start date
wha?
Yep, the NSPCC found it was a third of teenage girls who suffered sexual violence being committed towards them. But hey who cares about facts, figures and actual data and stuff like that!
Since when did sexual violence amount to rape, they are two very different things. And only applies to the younger generation.
See you neglect to state in the same survey 16% of boys said they where sexually assaulted as well.
If we include those stats, it probably be nearer to 100% who hasn't had there crotch grabbed in a night club.
The 1 in4 rape claim is **** it's a 1985 college survy and the question that got 1 in 4 wasn't even about. Rape, of those 1 in 4 only 27% saw themself as a victim of rape, the rest just regretted the sex. Which is close to 1 in 14 which sounds more like it in a college situation with booze, drugs and parties.
Even that won't be representative of the whole population.
See you neglect to state in the same survey 16% of boys said they where sexually assaulted as well.
If we include those stats, it probably be nearer to 100% who hasn't had there crotch grabbed in a night club.
The 1 in4 rape claim is **** it's a 1985 college survy and the question that got 1 in 4 wasn't even about. Rape, of those 1 in 4 only 27% saw themself as a victim of rape, the rest just regretted the sex. Which is close to 1 in 14 which sounds more like it in a college situation with booze, drugs and parties.
Even that won't be representative of the whole population.
Last edited:
I had no need to mention the boys we are not on about boys you were flippantly dismissing the 1:4. I was merely pointing out the exposure people have and it is hardly a stretch then (with no real figures for obvious reasons) to see that if 1/3 of women have experienced sexual violence by the age of 18 (including rape) then by the end of their lives they will have significantly more exposure to risk.
And that is just for this country - what about others were the chance of rape is so much higher. Maybe the 1:4 is not such a wrong figure. Male rape well that is well under-reported and something that is only becoming more apparent now and is woefully ignored.
Which makes it acceptable how exactly? By saying that surely you are aiding hurfdurf's viewpoint that there is an unacceptable culture of behaviour.
I wasn't flippingltly, I was refuting it, It is total an utter hyperbol.
See this is the problem with you two.
Where did I say it made it ok? Oh wait I didn't. It's just you two are very opinionated with incorrect "facts".
Nice how you ignored the fact your stats do not support 1 in 4 women are raped.
See this is the problem with you two.
Where did I say it made it ok? Oh wait I didn't. It's just you two are very opinionated with incorrect "facts".
Nice how you ignored the fact your stats do not support 1 in 4 women are raped.
Has anything been proven yet? Without the man himself there is there anyway in which this could go to court so that genuine evidence could be heard/seen rather than the current "trial by media" where he's instantly guilty just because people say he's molested them to a tabloid paper?
I never stated it was 1:4 - I said it potentially was going on that data from the NSPCC and the fact we are a darn sight more civilised over here. I believe the data you would want to look at would be best gained from someone like the CDC - and here you go I bothered to look it up - they say 1:5. http://www.cdc.gov/ViolencePrevention/pdf/NISVS_Report2010-a.pdf#
So feel free to say 1:4 hyperbole it not that it's 1:5 there you go that's nothing is it! Hurfdurf's facts seem to bear out quite well compared to your refutation.
Soldato
- Joined
- 14 Feb 2004
- Posts
- 14,312
- Location
- Peoples Republic of Histonia, Cambridge
It won't got to court. But an enquiry can held to ascertain likelihood of guilt. If a person is alive and they use the right to remain silent they can still be convicted. Tbh, there is little doubt. It's over 100 allegation and several credible witnesses. It's unreasonable to think they're all lying.
Last edited:
Nope - strangely enough I've acquired this knack of knowing who publishes information on such things and how and where they present it - page 68 to be exact in this case - not strictly speaking 1:5 ... 18.3% to be exact but I am sure you get the drift. Also the report acknowledges the potential for under-reporting due to their sample size eg missing of the US military which would have boosted all figures significantly.
See it's fine to dismiss that old college study but the strange thing that information is only relevant and allows you to throw the hyperbole comments around if the same conclusions or similar have not been subsequently reached elsewhere. But I guess you've made your mind up and no amount of evidence will sway you otherwise.
So with 18.3% in the USA, god knows what in Africa and South America and high figures in Sweden due to measuring do you think maybe it is time you stop dismissing things just because one report got it wrong. Or would that be to difficult? And you said there was a problem with us two ...
As I said I don't care about other countries and the 1in 4 is hyperbol. And would love to see the method, see it includes alcholo in that study as well, so does that once again include people's regret at one night stand.
There is a problem with you two, that stands. Anyone who doesn't agree with you two are instantly classed as apologists. Even if that. Haven't said what you apply. Take a. Looks your response to my earlier post.
There is a problem with you two, that stands. Anyone who doesn't agree with you two are instantly classed as apologists. Even if that. Haven't said what you apply. Take a. Looks your response to my earlier post.
Hurfdurf may say you are an apologist - I don't think I have used that term once. I am just point out you've based your whole argument on a position that one study was flawed.
However, I am sure you are correct and the Centre for Disease Control are wrong. You are probably right every single one of those women was under the influence of alcohol ....
Lol every one under. Influence of alcohol. Where did I say that. The inclusion of alcholo and regrettable sex massively changes the numbers. As you didn't respon normally I can only assume you haven't read the report as I see it goes through the method used.
The report quite clearly addresses that and under-reporting etc, false-reporting etc. It's all there. And yet you still dismiss it. So do you only accept things that substantiate you preconceived ideas?
So is that CDC report wrong? If so why are you correct in your hunches and the experts wrong? Where is your evidence to the contrary. We seem to be moving away from that.
Or do you accept that the CDC report is correct but then argue that it's a USA thing and that the figures in the UK would be substantially less.
See the way I see it you said hurfdurf was talking out of his ****. But then the CDC say 1:5 and the NSPCC say 1/3 of teenage girls will experience sexual violence. I am seeing diddly squat from you to actually see why you dismissed him so easily.
I haven't read it, which is why I asked you the method on the alcholo, which you still haven't stated, funnily enough I can't read 20pages in a few minutes.
And why do you. Keep saying 1in 3 that isn't drape and has zero to do with the. Discussion.
I callled him out on the 1 in 4 as 1in4 is totally wrong and is byte bush analysis of an inadequate report. That still stands, as for the CDC I would need to know the method on it, as you haven't noticed I haven't once called it rubbish, I've asked what the method is.
And why do you. Keep saying 1in 3 that isn't drape and has zero to do with the. Discussion.
I callled him out on the 1 in 4 as 1in4 is totally wrong and is byte bush analysis of an inadequate report. That still stands, as for the CDC I would need to know the method on it, as you haven't noticed I haven't once called it rubbish, I've asked what the method is.
Random dialling across 50 states and the district of Columbia with 16,507 adults responding completely to interview.
Last edited:
That's not the method I have asked for.