• Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
    • Access to private conversations with other members.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

Everyday Sexism by Females

freethinker44

Well-Known Member
Statistics and logic do not diminish a fear that's reinforced by media.

It being reinforced by the media doesn't make it any less irrational. And I hope you're not implying that it's OK to believe something that is patently false just because the media says so.

Besides, the sort of back-alley rape we see in movies is actually a relatively uncommon form of it. The majority of rapes are committed by someone the victim knows, and generally occur in a situation of perceived safety.

That's exactly what I said.

And furthermore, I've come to a hypothesis that in the majority of rape cases, the rapist does not realize that he or she has committed rape.

I agree but this doesn't seem relevant.

After all, you saying I should be skeptical of it because I've not personally experienced it, is akin to saying I should be skeptical of the fact that war happens at all, or to the degree it does, because I've not personally experienced it.

This analogy isn't accurate at all. War is something that actually happens to the degree it is claimed if not more. For the analogy to true you would need to compare to something else that is widely believed but statistically disprovable.

And experience has little to do with it. We don't have to actually physically experience something to know if they are true. This is kind of the same argument creationists try to use when they challenge archeological claims with "were you there?"

Considering the population numbers, that difference of 4% is incredibly significant.

In 2010, the US population was about 300,000,000. 16% of that is 48,000,000, while 20% is 60,000,000. That's a difference of 12,000,000: close to the total population of New York and Los Angeles for that year.

Not even remotely "pretty close."

Your math is wrong, first of all. Everyone would need to be simultaneously male and female for those numbers to work.

Second of all, there is a reason we use percentages when comparing extremely large numbers. It's like when politicians talk about cutting the budget and bring up some huge dollar amount going to some group to cut and at first it seems ridiculous that they would get that much money, and it is a lot of money for sure, enough to make even the wealthiest people drool, but when you compare it as a percentage of the whole it comes out to half a percent or something and it becomes clear that it isn't a lot of money in the proper perspective.

For the proper perspective:
Make a bar graph that goes from 0 to 100
Add a bar that goes to 100, this is the total US population (assuming 300 mil)
Then add two more bars next to that one, one at the 10 mark and one at the 8 mark
The 10 represents the women in the US that have been raped
The 8 represents the men in the US that have been raped

Does it still look "Not even remotely "pretty close.""?

So yeah, be skeptical. There is no harm in being skeptical as long as your beliefs are true.
 
Top