Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #251  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:17 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post
Let's accept this figure as accurate and go with eight percent. That means ninety-two percent of accusations are true.

Trump's been accused sixteen times (or more). Let's go with the low figure of sixteen.

Run the numbers. They say that there's 99.9999999999999995601953% chance that Trump is guilty. And a .0000000000000004398047% chance he's innocent.
I agree that Trump has done some bad things. Iím not discussing Trumpís record in general, just this one single allegation.

FYI, thatís not really how statistics work, and you canít apply the #s that way.

Ever roll three sevens in a row? Ever get dealt blackjack twice in a row? That latter has a .00016 probability but it happens.

Additionally, you are not taking environmental statistics into account. I.e. your chances of getting attacked by a shark while swimming are one in many million. However if you Swim off the beach of the Farrolon islands during seal breeding season your chances approach 100%

Similarly, it seems that famous and powerful people attract these actions at a higher level than the general public. Biden took a bunch of them not too long ago.

Finally that statistic is just for ones that are reported to the police. Filing a false police report carries a penalty. I donít have statistics for ones that are made but not reported to the police. However, it is probably reasonable to guess that these would have a higher rate since they could be made with fewer consequences.

None of this is a defense of Trump. I just donít like the way you took liberty with the statistics.
  #252  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:25 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
FBI puts the number as high as 7-8%.
Quote:
This estimate, however, does not appear in subsequent FBI reports.[37][38][39] This estimate was criticised by academic Bruce Gross as almost meaningless as many jurisdictions from which FBI collects data use different definition of "unfounded", which, he wrote, includes cases where the victim did not physically fight off the suspect or the suspect did not use a weapon, and cases where the victim had a prior relationship to the suspect.[13]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_...5%E2%80%931997)

...a dubious statistic that hasn't been updated since 1997.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I just don’t like the way you took liberty with the statistics.
LOL.

Last edited by Banquet Bear; 06-29-2019 at 04:26 PM.
  #253  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:25 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke N. Destroi View Post
Normal channels would be police / DA. Did they do that?

Abnormal channels would be multi-media self-promotion via purported victimhood.
In many cases, yes. Certainly among the victims and survivors I know -- generally, the police treated them like crap.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Zeke N. Destroi View Post
Oh for Christ's sake man. Again you are unconvinced. Fuck!

Is it being weaponized? Yes. There are clear cut examples of it. Is it weaponized in most or even many cases? No, very few. Do journalists get duped? Yes and one would have to be institutionalizably naive to believe otherwise. Do some journalists make shit up or act dishonestly to further their career? See the answer to "do they get duped."

Here is the thing, 25 years after an unreported rape there is no evidence. There is no rape kit, pictures, worthwhile testimony - nothing. It becomes nothing more than he said, she said. I'll be fucked if I'll call anyone a rapist based on nothing more than that.
I agree -- I call Trump a rapist because of the over 20 accusations, plus Trump's own words.

Quote:
I hate to defend Trump. I have <0% doubt that Trump has forced himself on women in the past - possibly present. But that is belief, not knowledge.

Here are some questions for you: 1)Why do these women chose to reveal their "shocking secret" at a time and in a way that they profit from? Why always the big publicity grab? 2) Why is there so much evidence - actual evidence - against Weinstein and Cosby and the like but none against Trump? Not one police report, not one teary confession to a friend, not even an accusatory fucking poem.
1) I don't think this is the case. Most of them did not profit from speaking out. Many of them suffered for it.

2) In my understanding, the vast majority of the evidence against Weinstein and Cosby is the accounts and testimony of the victims/survivors; i.e. the same type of evidence that would likely be present in any prosecution of Trump.
  #254  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:31 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Andy:

Letís be clear. Again. This is not about Trump. I am not defending Trump. I am consistent in my beliefs and would do the same if it were against anyone else.
I am looking at the merits of the accusation alone. I have not denigrated the women or made any derogatory comments about how that extend outside of the immediate scope of the narrative that she voluntarily put into the public eye in lieu of going to the police.


With that said, I donít see us making any further headway here.
I am looking at the merits of this accusation in the context of the present, which includes many other allegations and Trump's own words. IMO you have indeed denigrated Carroll by accusing her of dishonesty with no actual evidence. But you're probably right, we're not going to make any further headway here. I suspect the difference in our outlook stems from the same source as the difference in most of our political opinions -- I suspect you see the American system and American society as, broadly speaking, just and fair, and I see the American system and our society as, broadly speaking, lacking fairness and justice, with only an illusion of fairness and justice.
  #255  
Old 06-29-2019, 04:55 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Good article on the consequences of false rape allegations:

https://world.wng.org/2019/03/false_...s_ruined_lives

FBI puts the number as high as 7-8%. This, of course, is for the ones that are reported to the police. It doesnít include the ones that are made casually or just through the media
Here's a story of an unfounded rape accusation:

https://www.propublica.org/article/f...lievable-story

I've posted this story before. I think I may have even read it here first. This case is/was included in unfounded statistics- until it wasn't.
  #256  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:01 PM
nearwildheaven is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Apr 2013
Posts: 13,096
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shodan View Post
The accuser has what appears to be an unusual reaction to the alleged rape. She says that she regrets not asking Trump for his tax returns, and that she doesn't want to press charges because it would be disrespectful to women being raped at the border.

She also believes that most people think rape is sexy, which I for one do not.
I'm skeptical about this whole story for a number of reasons. Did nobody notice that a man, especially a famous one, was lurking around the women's room, and didn't anyone hear anything?
  #257  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:47 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
Here's a story of an unfounded rape accusation:

https://www.propublica.org/article/f...lievable-story

I've posted this story before. I think I may have even read it here first. This case is/was included in unfounded statistics- until it wasn't.
I read it the first time you posted it.

Iím not sure what your point is. Is it that the police get it wrong sometimes? Ultimately they did get it right, you know?

Are you expecting that the world is fair, and reporting a crime automatically means justice gets done with 100% accuracy.

You also realize selection bias plays a part here. It doesnít make a big new story and get people in an uproar when the police get it caught.

If I search for airplane crashes, I can provide 100s or 1000s of news stories where planes crashed. How many news stories are there about when a plane takes off and lands and nothing goes wrong?

Youíve shown this twice, so what are you trying to tell me with it?
  #258  
Old 06-29-2019, 05:51 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Are you expecting that the world is fair
...you concede the "world isn't fair?"
  #259  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:02 PM
Acsenray is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: U.S.A.
Posts: 36,316
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Are you expecting that the world is fair, and reporting a crime automatically means justice gets done with 100% accuracy.
This is just a cop-out.

The system we are talking about encompasses a lot more than the police and courts. Itís everything in society.

The system is a lot more fair to the Clarence Thomases, Brett Kavanaughs, and Donald Trumps of the world than it is to the Anita Hills, Christine Blasey Fords, and E. Jean Carrolls of the world.

Big what this goes to show again is that conservatism has only one principle, and that is the protection of the status quo hierarchy.
__________________
*I'm experimenting with E, em, and es and emself as pronouns that do not indicate any specific gender nor exclude any specific gender.
  #260  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:04 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I read it the first time you posted it.

Iím not sure what your point is. Is it that the police get it wrong sometimes? Ultimately they did get it right, you know?

Are you expecting that the world is fair, and reporting a crime automatically means justice gets done with 100% accuracy.

You also realize selection bias plays a part here. It doesnít make a big new story and get people in an uproar when the police get it caught.

If I search for airplane crashes, I can provide 100s or 1000s of news stories where planes crashed. How many news stories are there about when a plane takes off and lands and nothing goes wrong?

Youíve shown this twice, so what are you trying to tell me with it?

The point is that "unfounded" accusations are not the same thing as false accusations.
  #261  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:09 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I read it the first time you posted it.

I’m not sure what your point is. Is it that the police get it wrong sometimes? Ultimately they did get it right, you know?

Are you expecting that the world is fair, and reporting a crime automatically means justice gets done with 100% accuracy.

You also realize selection bias plays a part here. It doesn’t make a big new story and get people in an uproar when the police get it caught.

If I search for airplane crashes, I can provide 100s or 1000s of news stories where planes crashed. How many news stories are there about when a plane takes off and lands and nothing goes wrong?

You’ve shown this twice, so what are you trying to tell me with it?
"Ultimately they got it right" because they caught the rapist on another rape and found he had taken pictures of her. Not because they didn't give up, or because someone believed her- the police department she reported it to prosecuted her for a false report that wasn't false. Tell me again about how many reports are deemed "unfounded."

Last edited by raventhief; 06-29-2019 at 06:10 PM.
  #262  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:09 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I am looking at the merits of this accusation in the context of the present, which includes many other allegations and Trump's own words. IMO you have indeed denigrated Carroll by accusing her of dishonesty with no actual evidence.
Well I suppose youíve denigrated me by disagreeing with my arguments and suggesting that iím Wrong, and I, you.

You keep saying this ďwithout evidence.Ē In my first post I posted a whole bunch of things that I thought were fishy about her story. If you consider her story evidence, than that is evidence too. You disagree with it, or think iyís Wrong. Now your denigrating me without evidence?

Wtf?

Quote:
But you're probably right, we're not going to make any further headway here. I suspect the difference in our outlook stems from the same source as the difference in most of our political opinions -- I suspect you see the American system and American society as, broadly speaking, just and fair, and I see the American system and our society as, broadly speaking, lacking fairness and justice, with only an illusion of fairness and justice.
No. You donít get where I am coming from at all. I know that things are fucked up. I know that the world is unfair. I justice and fairness is as rare as a snowflake in July. Iíve been around.

We have had to work very hard for a very long time to get the modicum of justice and fairness and equality that we do have. Step by step little by little, over 1000s of years weíve learned gradually to do a little bit better.

You seem to want to throw that all away and try something that youíve just thought without even bothering to think through the consequences that would occur.

You probably donít even realize that this drivel is just recycled socialist dogma. Every time itís been tried 10s of millions of people end up dying.

ďYes, we will step outside of the system and just accept accusations uncritically against the rich and powerful people that we donít like, so we can get rid of them. We donít need courts because the journalists are really good at figuring this stuff out. Nobody should be allowed to contradict an accuser because that would be accusing them of lying without evidence that they lied. The story that the accuser tells is ďevidenceĒ. When someone disputes it or ďdenigratesĒ it that is not evidence. ď

No you got me wrong. I know the world is unfair and unjust. I donít trust the justice system or the police.

I just trust you less. I trust the press less. I trust the SJWs less. I trust the accusers less. I trust the accused less.

The justice system is simply the tallest dwarf. What you propose is infinitely worse.
  #263  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:11 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
"Ultimately they got it right" because they caught the rapist on another rape and found he had taken pictures of her. Not because they didn't give up, or because someone believed her- the police department she reported it to prosecuted her for a false report that wasn't false. Tell me again about how many reports are deemed "unfounded."
22 a day according to the cite I posted earlier.
  #264  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:23 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Well I suppose youíve denigrated me by disagreeing with my arguments and suggesting that iím Wrong, and I, you.
Yes, I've denigrated you. I have no problem with denigrating those who attack women for nothing more than telling their stories. It doesn't mean you're an awful person, but I think you're very wrong here.

Quote:
You keep saying this ďwithout evidence.Ē In my first post I posted a whole bunch of things that I thought were fishy about her story. If you consider her story evidence, than that is evidence too. You disagree with it, or think iyís Wrong. Now your denigrating me without evidence?

Wtf?
Ha! I'm denigrating you based on the evidence of your evidence-free attacks on Carroll. What you posted that's supposedly "fishy" is not actually evidence of dishonesty. Evidence of dishonesty would look like her friend saying "she told me she made it up because she hates Trump", or a payment from a tabloid with an accompanying email that tells her to lie about it, or something like that.

Quote:
No. You donít get where I am coming from at all. I know that things are fucked up. I know that the world is unfair. I justice and fairness is as rare as a snowflake in July. Iíve been around.

We have had to work very hard for a very long time to get the modicum of justice and fairness and equality that we do have. Step by step little by little, over 1000s of years weíve learned gradually to do a little bit better.

You seem to want to throw that all away and try something that youíve just thought without even bothering to think through the consequences that would occur.

You probably donít even realize that this drivel is just recycled socialist dogma. Every time itís been tried 10s of millions of people end up dying.

ďYes, we will step outside of the system and just accept accusations uncritically against the rich and powerful people that we donít like, so we can get rid of them. We donít need courts because the journalists are really good at figuring this stuff out. Nobody should be allowed to contradict an accuser because that would be accusing them of lying without evidence that they lied. The story that the accuser tells is ďevidenceĒ. When someone disputes it or ďdenigratesĒ it that is not evidence. ď

No you got me wrong. I know the world is unfair and unjust. I donít trust the justice system or the police.

I just trust you less. I trust the press less. I trust the SJWs less. I trust the accusers less. I trust the accused less.

The justice system is simply the tallest dwarf. What you propose is infinitely worse.
That last part is the fundamental disagreement -- I think the justice system is, generally speaking, a tool for the powerful to maintain the status quo. Not a tool for justice. So I generally trust them less than accusers, the press, etc.
  #265  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:29 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
22 a day according to the cite I posted earlier.
And how many of those are false?
  #266  
Old 06-29-2019, 06:54 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
22 a day according to the cite I posted earlier.
...the number you cited turned out to be complete and utter bullshit. You didn't even do a smidgen of work to verify the number. Odd behaviour from someone who claims to be "skeptical."
  #267  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:04 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by raventhief View Post
And how many of those are false?
22
  #268  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:07 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...the number you cited turned out to be complete and utter bullshit. You didn't even do a smidgen of work to verify the number. Odd behaviour from someone who claims to be "skeptical."
No it didnít. The person that said it was just skimmed the article. It was the 5 that was considered bullshit.

The article actually looks at several different #s from several sources. You should read it.
  #269  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:24 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
22
So there are no "unfounded" accusations that are not false?
  #270  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:34 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
No it didnít. The person that said it was just skimmed the article. It was the 5 that was considered bullshit.
...you appear to have skimmed the thread. The person who "said it was" was me.

Quote:
The article actually looks at several different #s from several sources. You should read it.
LOL. The MAD report makes no claim of "22 a day." That was an extrapolation by the author: an appalling abuse of statistics and not something a true skeptic would repeat. You really need to stop taking liberty with the numbers.
  #271  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:35 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
Yes, I've denigrated you. I have no problem with denigrating those who attack women for nothing more than telling their stories.
I denigrate people who denigrate other people by making serious accusations toward them outside of the legal system, especially when said accusations are timed with the release of their book publicity tour.


Quote:
It doesn't mean you're an awful person, but I think you're very wrong here.
Itís a comfort to know that Iím hovering somewhere above awfulness in your estimation.



Quote:
Ha! I'm denigrating you based on the evidence of your evidence-free attacks on Carroll.
How dare you! that is my story, my truth, based on 50 plus years of existence on this planet living o. The real world and dealing with all kinds of people. Who are you to denigrate my interpretation of what I have seen. Who are you to chide me and suggest I shouldnít share it. I never dared to say that she should silence herself or that she shouldnít be free to tell her story on the news if that was how she wanted to. I simply disapproved of her choice.

You on the other hand have gone so far as to tell me several times that I shouldnít publically doubt her story. You have suggested that I silence my voice, my story, my experience, my feelings!

You have gone far out of bounds. I have simply disapproved if her choice. Youíve dared to tell me I am not supposed to make one.


Quote:
What you posted that's supposedly "fishy" is not actually evidence of dishonesty. Evidence of dishonesty would look like her friend saying "she told me she made it up because she hates Trump", or a payment from a tabloid with an accompanying email that tells her to lie about it, or something like that.
This is interesting. You. One single person on the internet is now telling me what evidence is and isnít. Do you possess any training in evidentiary standards? Your full of shit. You are making this up as you go along. Half-baked is giving it too much credit.

Again, this goes back to climbing back up through several thousand years of trial and error to try to create a justice system that makes some kind of sense. You on the other hand are like ďwell that doesnít work and fails lots of people, and journalists and well-intentioned people on the internet are going to get it right by making it up as we go alongĒ

Good luck with that.



Quote:
That last part is the fundamental disagreement -- I think the justice system is, generally speaking, a tool for the powerful to maintain the status quo. Not a tool for justice. So I generally trust them less than accusers, the press, etc.

Sure. No doubt. Ok. No question it does a lot of that. I have never said that it didnít suck and fail and do all kinds of bad shit. I think I have been pretty forthright and agreeable on this point.

I just think that it works better than anything else anybody has come up with so far.

You want to get rid of it and replace it with something else. Ok. I am slightly concerned that what this really means is that you want to replace it with a much more restrictive and unfair system that will be even worse.... except with the people you approve of in power. Thatís the best case scenario.

Most likely, it will end up with 10s of millions of people dead and the rest of the populace enslaved, the way it has every other time weíve replaced representative Democracy and capitalism with socialism.

But letís examine your system so far:

1. Accusers can accuse anybody especially if they are rich and powerful, and if is wrong to contradict them.

2. Journalists are really good at finding the truth, so we donít have to worry about false accusations and hoaxes

What else?

Iíve been pretty denigrating here, but you have also seen me thoughtful and open.

What do you wish to replace the criminal justice system with? What is your Vision of how a better society should deal with this?

So far we have just been arguing about little bits and pieces. Perhaps if I saw the big picture I would understand. Lay it on me.
  #272  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:50 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Sure. No doubt. Ok. No question it does a lot of that. I have never said that it didnít suck and fail and do all kinds of bad shit. I think I have been pretty forthright and agreeable on this point.

I just think that it works better than anything else anybody has come up with so far.

You want to get rid of it and replace it with something else. Ok. I am slightly concerned that what this really means is that you want to replace it with a much more restrictive and unfair system that will be even worse.... except with the people you approve of in power. Thatís the best case scenario.

Most likely, it will end up with 10s of millions of people dead and the rest of the populace enslaved, the way it has every other time weíve replaced representative Democracy and capitalism with socialism.

But letís examine your system so far:

1. Accusers can accuse anybody especially if they are rich and powerful, and if is wrong to contradict them.

2. Journalists are really good at finding the truth, so we donít have to worry about false accusations and hoaxes

What else?

Iíve been pretty denigrating here, but you have also seen me thoughtful and open.

What do you wish to replace the criminal justice system with? What is your Vision of how a better society should deal with this?

So far we have just been arguing about little bits and pieces. Perhaps if I saw the big picture I would understand. Lay it on me.
Snipping the silly back-and-forth for this part, which is more interesting.

No, I don't want to "replace the justice system" -- I want to make it live up to its ideals. And I want to make society live up to what should be its ideals. In both cases -- justice, fairness, compassion, etc. All of this has utterly failed most victims and survivors of rape, and this has only very recently begun to change on any sort of a significant scale. There are many such injustices in our systems, but this is one of the worst, IMO, because it has meant that powerful men could abuse women pretty much at will, with a very low chance of consequences. And I think this is still going on today -- still, so many are skeptical of women who come forward, always finding stuff that's supposedly "fishy", or something like that... when every story is always going to have something weird. This is real life... almost nothing is easy and pat and obvious. People are far from perfect, including victims -- sometimes they'll laugh at the wrong time. Sometimes they'll say something that sounds awkward. Sometimes they'll be cowardly or just afraid with good reason. Sometimes they'll tell their story at a time that might have a chance to improve their life. Or a million other things.

Yes, occasionally women lie... but rarely. Very rarely, in my understanding. If Carroll is lying, she risks destroying her (extremely successful) reputation forever -- all for what? A few thousand extra copies of her book sold? Some tiny chance of doing political damage to Trump? Do you really think that's more likely than that Trump, who bragged about sexual assault and has been accused by over a dozen women, really assaulted her?

That just seems nuts to me, barring evidence that Carroll is a serial liar (there is no such evidence, in my understanding). Do 70-something year old women just happen to come up with rape accusations willy-nilly? That's more plausible to you than that Trump sexually assaulted her in the 90s?

I just don't understand this thinking. Yes, very occasionally women lie about rape. Generally, desperate women, or drug addicts, or the chronically poor, etc. But very successful writers in their 70s, with an enormous amount to lose?

Sure, maybe it's possible. Maybe Carroll is an alien, too. But Trump being a sexual assaulter seems about a million times more likely than either of these possibilities.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-29-2019 at 07:52 PM.
  #273  
Old 06-29-2019, 07:53 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
That last part is what it comes down to. Which is more likely? That a very successful and relatively wealthy writer in her 70s decides to risk destroying her reputation forever so she can sell a few thousand more books, or that Trump, who has bragged about sexual assault and been accused by over a dozen women, actually assaulted her as per her account? That seems like a pretty damn easy comparison to me.

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-29-2019 at 07:55 PM.
  #274  
Old 06-29-2019, 08:13 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
So how exactly do you plan to improve on the criminal justice system?

The idea that you are going to improve something contains the implicit idea that you understand itís strengths, weaknesses and failings enough to know how to improve it.

As Iíve mentioned, our legal system has grown and evolved since before Hammerabiís code, and in those thousands of years countless millions of people have worked very hard to improve it (because there is a lot at stake.). Sometimes those efforts have been successful. More often , attempts to improve it have left it more broken.

It has been a painful glacial journey. Two steps forward one step back to get where we are now.

You think it sucks and want to make it better. great. You donít want to replace it, you say. It seems like you proposing some addition or alternate system, something including journalists and storytelling and chastising people who are skeptical of some accusations.

You have not given me a complete picture of what you want. So far I have;

The justice system is a tool of the rich and powerful and fails most deserving g people most of the time. To fix it

1. Anybody can accuse anytime, inside or outside of the justice system.

2. If you accuse outside of the justice system it is wrong for other people to publically disbelieve you.

3. If you are accused wrongly, the press is really good at finding hoaxers so donít worry.


This is really all that you have given me. Can you fill this in? If you want me to go along with what you are saying you kind of owe me the big picture about what exactly you are seeking to do, how you are going to do it and why it will be better.

Weíve talked before and I know you are a smart guy. Hopefully you have something. Hopefully you can see that you canít expect my cooperation from the little bits aspires youíve shared.

Do you have a fully baked idea here?
  #275  
Old 06-29-2019, 08:23 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
So how exactly do you plan to improve on the criminal justice system?

The idea that you are going to improve something contains the implicit idea that you understand it’s strengths, weaknesses and failings enough to know how to improve it.

As I’ve mentioned, our legal system has grown and evolved since before Hammerabi’s code, and in those thousands of years countless millions of people have worked very hard to improve it (because there is a lot at stake.). Sometimes those efforts have been successful. More often , attempts to improve it have left it more broken.

It has been a painful glacial journey. Two steps forward one step back to get where we are now.

You think it sucks and want to make it better. great. You don’t want to replace it, you say. It seems like you proposing some addition or alternate system, something including journalists and storytelling and chastising people who are skeptical of some accusations.

You have not given me a complete picture of what you want. So far I have;

The justice system is a tool of the rich and powerful and fails most deserving g people most of the time. To fix it

1. Anybody can accuse anytime, inside or outside of the justice system.

2. If you accuse outside of the justice system it is wrong for other people to publically disbelieve you.

3. If you are accused wrongly, the press is really good at finding hoaxers so don’t worry.


This is really all that you have given me. Can you fill this in? If you want me to go along with what you are saying you kind of owe me the big picture about what exactly you are seeking to do, how you are going to do it and why it will be better.

We’ve talked before and I know you are a smart guy. Hopefully you have something. Hopefully you can see that you can’t expect my cooperation from the little bits aspires you’ve shared.

Do you have a fully baked idea here?
1 is already true, and always has been. Anyone can say anything they like. They might get sued, if it's false and defamatory.

2 is not something I'm for. I don't care what you believe -- I care what you put out into society. It's wrong to do and say things that make it harder for victims and survivors of sexual assault and rape to come forward, when it's already so, so hard. That means it's wrong to accuse or even imply dishonesty in an accuser without proof. Say "I'm reserving judgment for more evidence" all you want -- that's not denigrating anyone.

3 is generally accurate. I'm sure it would be terrible to be falsely accused, but powerful men have enormous resources to fight accurate accusations, and usually win... fighting the false ones is a relative breeze.

But this is separate from how the justice system should improve WRT sexual assault and rape. In my understanding, they often treat accusers like suspects -- they drill down with hostility, rather than starting with compassion. And they include members of an inherently patriarchal culture -- usually men, but also women -- who so often see rape as only the stranger-in-a-bush variety... anything else must have been brought about by the accuser. What was she wearing? Is she promiscuous? Why did she go up to his apartment, or in the dressing room? Why did she flirt with him? Etc. None of that is actually relevant to whether she might have been raped, but it's used to browbeat accusers just the same. Those are the kinds of things that need to be improved.

Relating to this specific case, I hope you'll evaluate the question I've just asked a couple of times in previous posts -- Which is more likely? That a very successful and relatively wealthy writer in her 70s decides to risk destroying her reputation forever so she can sell a few thousand more books? Or that Trump, who has bragged about sexual assault and been accused by over a dozen women, actually assaulted her as per her account?

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-29-2019 at 08:24 PM.
  #276  
Old 06-29-2019, 08:49 PM
nelliebly is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2017
Location: Washington
Posts: 1,911
[QUOTE=Scylla;21724759]
Quote:
How dare you! that is my story, my truth,
Please excuse the snip. The irony was too rich to ignore.
  #277  
Old 06-29-2019, 08:51 PM
Ambivalid is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 14,111
[QUOTE=nelliebly;21724816]
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
[B]

Please excuse the snip. The irony was too rich to ignore.
I think that was sarcasm.
  #278  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:01 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post

Relating to this specific case, I hope you'll evaluate the question I've just asked a couple of times in previous posts -- Which is more likely? That a very successful and relatively wealthy writer in her 70s decides to risk destroying her reputation forever so she can sell a few thousand more books? Or that Trump, who has bragged about sexual assault and been accused by over a dozen women, actually assaulted her as per her account?

Likely is the wrong question: for starters their are billions of women Trump has not assaulted, so she is ďlikelyĒ to be in this latter category.

It is also my experience that pretty much everybody lies all the time about everything (and the psychological literature backs me up on this,) even when there is nothing at stake or nothing to be gained. Because of this, I place literally 0 weight to any store that canít be backed up with more direct evidence.

I also donít care which is more likely. I care about what can be proven. If she canít prove that it happened and she is unwilling to engage the authorities to help her do so, than, as far as I am concerned it do not happen.

But I will answer your question. I think it is more likely that it didnít happen. You mention that she is risking her reputation by making this accusation. She is actually risking nothing. The only way this could hurt her is if she actually confessed that she made it up, or, if she makes her specific enough that it can be verified or proven false, or if she files a false police report. By accident or design, those things seem unlikely. Trump is a relatively safe target to attack. It would hurt him more and give her more attention and publicity and sympathy if he were to actually try to sue her. The more attention she gets the more books she sells. So no, she is not risking anything. She has everything to gain and absolutely nothing to lose by making this accusation as long as she is not incredibly stupid and entrails herself.

So the real question is is it more likely that she is doing this because she has nothing to lose and can be famous and get a lot of attention, and be a hero to Trump haters and sell lots of books and make a ton of money, or that it actually happened and that she sat on it for 29 years in spite of having a voice and a platform and wonít press charges because that would distract from migrant workers who get raped 24/7?

But that is not the reason I think that it is likely it didnít happen (though itís a good one.). The big reason that I think it unlikely is because as Trump pointed out ďSheís not my type.Ē This disarmingly shallow and contemptible statement wax presented by Trump as if it were all the proof he needed for anybody to believe.

The fact is, she is not his type, because they are close in age. Trump tends to trade in his wives regularly for younger versions and looking st the pool of accusers against him seems to confirm his preference.
  #279  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:06 PM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
But that is not the reason I think that it is likely it didnít happen (though itís a good one.). The big reason that I think it unlikely is because as Trump pointed out ďSheís not my type.Ē This disarmingly shallow and contemptible statement wax presented by Trump as if it were all the proof he needed for anybody to believe.

The fact is, she is not his type, because they are close in age. Trump tends to trade in his wives regularly for younger versions and looking st the pool of accusers against him seems to confirm his preference.
I think we're done here, because this statement reveals (IMO) your profound and cavernous ignorance about rape and sexual assault.
  #280  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:11 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
The fact is, she is not his type, because they are close in age.
...you want us to take you seriously when you make claims like this and state that it is "a fact?"
  #281  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:32 PM
Poysyn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,359
Oh!

I can answer the question about the legal system - ALL police need to get training in proper forensic interview skills, or that there are special response teams that deal solely with sexual violence.

That judges and lawyers get training in trauma response and victimology.

That the loopholes that still exist in the system that allow for improper cross-examination be closed.

That all accusations are replied with ďBelieve firstĒ.

I know you will freak out, so let me finish. That the belief that the person was victimized by sexual violence is accepted - that does not mean that the accused is assumed guilty. That is what the investigation is for - these can be two separate things.

Analogy -

If I am struck by a car, there is medical and possibly psychological help offered right away. The investigation will determine if that driver was criminal in striking me, but there is never a question about whether I was struck and injured.
  #282  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:34 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
1 is already true, and always has been. Anyone can say anything they like. They might get sued, if it's false and defamatory.

2 is not something I'm for. I don't care what you believe -- I care what you put out into society. It's wrong to do and say things that make it harder for victims and survivors of sexual assault and rape to come forward, when it's already so, so hard. That means it's wrong to accuse or even imply dishonesty in an accuser without proof. Say "I'm reserving judgment for more evidence" all you want -- that's not denigrating anyone.

3 is generally accurate. I'm sure it would be terrible to be falsely accused, but powerful men have enormous resources to fight accurate accusations, and usually win... fighting the false ones is a relative breeze.

But this is separate from how the justice system should improve WRT sexual assault and rape. In my understanding, they often treat accusers like suspects -- they drill down with hostility, rather than starting with compassion. And they include members of an inherently patriarchal culture -- usually men, but also women -- who so often see rape as only the stranger-in-a-bush variety... anything else must have been brought about by the accuser. What was she wearing? Is she promiscuous? Why did she go up to his apartment, or in the dressing room? Why did she flirt with him? Etc. None of that is actually relevant to whether she might have been raped, but it's used to browbeat accusers just the same. Those are the kinds of things that need to be improved
I asked the question about what you would specifically do to replace/improve the justice system and what your vision of a better one was twice.

I had to do it a second time because the first time you just complained about what you saw as the failings of the current system?

That hasnít changed.

I take it you actually donít have a plan or any ideas.
  #283  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:35 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by iiandyiiii View Post
I think we're done here, because this statement reveals (IMO) your profound and cavernous ignorance about rape and sexual assault.
I suppose you have a PhD?


Donít do me any favors.
  #284  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:38 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Poysyn View Post
Oh!

I can answer the question about the legal system - ALL police need to get training in proper forensic interview skills, or that there are special response teams that deal solely with sexual violence.

That judges and lawyers get training in trauma response and victimology.

That the loopholes that still exist in the system that allow for improper cross-examination be closed.

That all accusations are replied with ďBelieve firstĒ.

I know you will freak out, so let me finish. That the belief that the person was victimized by sexual violence is accepted - that does not mean that the accused is assumed guilty. That is what the investigation is for - these can be two separate things.

Analogy -

If I am struck by a car, there is medical and possibly psychological help offered right away. The investigation will determine if that driver was criminal in striking me, but there is never a question about whether I was struck and injured.
This all makes sense and I agree with everything except the loopholes part. The reason I donít agree is because I am ignorant of what you are referring to.

I would like to know what you are referring to though
  #285  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:42 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
A lot of that stuff is useful in general, not just for assault cases.
  #286  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:48 PM
Poysyn is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Winnipeg
Posts: 6,359
Here is where I admit I need to do more research - I know there are technically rape shield laws that are supposed to protect prior sexual history, for example, but I also know that there are workarounds that get this evidence admitted anyway.

This is a problem. If a law is not doing what it is supposed to do, then it needs to be revisited.
  #287  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:51 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I asked the question about what you would specifically do to replace/improve the justice system and what your vision of a better one was twice.

I had to do it a second time because the first time you just complained about what you saw as the failings of the current system?

That hasnít changed.

I take it you actually donít have a plan or any ideas.
...people aren't obliged to "dance at your request." You are perfectly happy to ignore challenges to the things you assert in this thread, you've ignored questions, you've ignored rebuttals, you've accused people who have laid out comphrensive cases that you've misrepresented the facts of this particular case of "accusing you of lying."

You've set the tone for this thread. Stop complaining that people are simply doing as you do.
  #288  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:56 PM
Little Nemo is online now
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: Western New York
Posts: 82,874
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I agree that Trump has done some bad things.
Sure, committing rape is just one of the bad things he's done. But I'm trying to stay focused on the thread topic.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Iím not discussing Trumpís record in general, just this one single allegation.
I think a rape accusation against Trump should be considered within the context of his history of committing rape.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
None of this is a defense of Trump.
I don't think this is an argument you want to pursue. Because if you're not defending Trump in particular for partisan political reasons, then it appears you're defending rapists in general.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I just donít like the way you took liberty with the statistics.
I didn't take any liberties with the statistics. I used the figures you provided to demonstrate how weak your argument is. So I can see why you didn't like it.
  #289  
Old 06-29-2019, 09:59 PM
raventhief's Avatar
raventhief is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 5,060
Fascinating. Apparently, if you don't know how to fix something, you are not allowed to acknowledge ways that it is broken. For instance, right now my washing machine is broken. I don't exactly know how to fix it, but I can recognize what's not working (it's not draining. But I guess I can't say that if I don't know how to fix it);

But I think I'm done here. Between the idea that "she's not my (rapin') type" is a valid and convincing defense, and the idea that "unfounded" means"false," even when presented with concrete examples that they are not synonyms...I just can't.
  #290  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:17 PM
Exapno Mapcase is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: NY but not NYC
Posts: 31,740
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...people aren't obliged to "dance at your request." You are perfectly happy to ignore challenges to the things you assert in this thread, you've ignored questions, you've ignored rebuttals, you've accused people who have laid out comphrensive cases that you've misrepresented the facts of this particular case of "accusing you of lying."

You've set the tone for this thread. Stop complaining that people are simply doing as you do.
I told you a while back that the style of Scylla's arguments were all you needed to know to understand the futility of expecting a reasonable response. Rebutting that style with facts, reason, or analysis will get you nowhere. The style becomes an infinite loop of saying what already was said. Once you see that loop, the best recourse is simply to stop wasting your time.
  #291  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:35 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...people aren't obliged to "dance at your request." You are perfectly happy to ignore challenges to the things you assert in this thread, you've ignored questions, you've ignored rebuttals, you've accused people who have laid out comphrensive cases that you've misrepresented the facts of this particular case of "accusing you of lying."

You've set the tone for this thread. Stop complaining that people are simply doing as you do.
He doesnít have to respond. Since he did, at length, twice, I assumed he wanted to answer the question. I was just pointing out that he answered a different question than I asked.

It;s not quite Beto suddenly speaking Spanish when asked a question that he didnít like, but it was still worth noting.
  #292  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:44 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Little Nemo View Post


I don't think this is an argument you want to pursue. Because if you're not defending Trump in particular for partisan political reasons, then it appears you're defending rapists in general.

Itís not Trump, nor rapists in general. Itís more interesting than that.

Letís say someone you know is accused seriously of rape. You donít know for sure whether or not he did it. He seemed like a good guy to you, not someone you would think would rape (so clearly not a stand in for Trump.). He claims he didnít do it. You talk to him and tend to believe him. You hear the accusers account, and your opinion tends to disbelieve the accusation. The fact is that you donít know. Canít know for sure.

Now, letís say somebody rips into this guy very hard, and, you think incorrectly. You decide to state your opinion.

Are you defending a rapist?

I am pointing out in this thread that being a rapist and being accused of a rapist are not the same things.
  #293  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:52 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Since he did, at length, twice, I assumed he wanted to answer the question.
...that was a silly assumption. If he wanted to answer the question he would have answered it.

Quote:
I was just pointing out that he answered a different question than I asked.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
I take it you actually donít have a plan or any ideas.
Its almost as if you think we can't actually see what you actually wrote.

Quote:
It;s not quite Beto suddenly speaking Spanish when asked a question that he didnít like, but it was still worth noting.
Its as noteworthy as you ignoring the rebuttal of the FBI 7-8% number, or as noteworthy as you repeating the ridiculous "22 per day" number, or as noteworthy as you (incorrectly) accusing Les Wizerables of "calling you a liar". All of which, unlike "Beto suddenly speaking Spanish", happened in this very thread.
  #294  
Old 06-29-2019, 10:56 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...you want us to take you seriously when you make claims like this and state that it is "a fact?"
Excuse my ignorance. What is the problem with what I said?
  #295  
Old 06-29-2019, 11:05 PM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Excuse my ignorance. What is the problem with what I said?
...you literally quoted me. You quoted "the problem I had with what you said."
  #296  
Old 06-29-2019, 11:34 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post

Its as noteworthy as you ignoring the rebuttal of the FBI 7-8% number, or as noteworthy as you repeating the ridiculous "22 per day"
The rebuttal cited Wikipedia and then said that the 7% number was based on a study done in 1997 and never updated and is therefore useless or worthless.

What my article actually said was:

ďn the 1990s, the FBI clocked the rate of specious allegations at 8 percent, according to Turvey. A 2016 meta-analysis of seven studies found an average false reporting rate of 5 percent. In the mid-2000s, the Making a Difference (MAD) project crunched stats on 2,059 rapes and sexual assaults specifically reported to U.S. law enforcement, the only study to do so. MAD found a false allegation rate of 7 percent.

How many is that? According to the FBI, law enforcement agencies received 116,645 reports of rapes or sexual assaults in 2014, the most recent year for which comprehensive law enforcement statistics are available. Applying MADís 7 percent false reporting rate, thatís a total of 8,165 false reportsóor about 22 every day of the year.Ē

This one quote mentions 4 different studies going from the 1990s to 2014. I looked at the Wikipedia cite, and I didnít feel that their cite really said what they seemed to think it said.

I concluded that the person really hadnít read the article, said so, and moved on. The person then came back with something I didnít real feel was worth my time.

How did I make that determination? Personal judgement call. In the very best discussions Iíve had we tend to be focused on ideas. People will get the gist of what i am saying with just a few words because they are reading sympathetically and I am doing the same and we are trying to understand what the other is saying.

In some of the worst discussions, the people think it is a game to misinterpret, or not understand, or misread.

In this particular circumstance I looked at what my article said, what their rebuttal link said, and thought ďoh ok. We are playing that game. No thanks.Ē I moved on. I assumed other people who wanted to have a good progressive discussion would conclude what I had concluded.


So thatís why I did what I did. You have concluded that my actions were unsatisfactory or hypocritical or something and are chiding me for them

Ok. Letís talk about it.

As you can see, there are 4 different studies cited, not one. The range is between 5-8%. The extrapolation of the math to lead to 22 based on a 7% rate is pretty straightforward. The first study is indeed from 1997 but the last is from 2014, so the interpretation of the Wikipedia argument (which was fast and loose, IMO, but whatever) that this was not a good number because itís just one study that needs updating, does not in fact hold water.

There. Iíve now backtracked and wasted time Explaining myself and addressing something that anybody worth talking too should be able to see for themselves without my help.

I did that for you because you seemed to think it was bad that I didnít. So please show me how this is interesting and noteworthy and how you are going to use it to exchange ideas in an interesting way or move the conversation along.

If I stop responding and go on to something else, you will now know why.

***

I will go a step further and anticipate a potential rebuttal. Something like ďScylla you are still a fucking hypocrite. You canít go ignoring stuff directed at you even if you think itís unworthy, while chiding Andy for not asking your questionsĒ


My answer would be that your right. I just choose where to invest my time and make a judgement. Andy is typically forthcoming and I thought my question interesting and worthy. I was asking him what his picture ideas for change were, and what he hoped to accomplish and how he would do it.

I thought that arguing about percentages that I had cited correctly from somebody who either wasnít bothering to read carefully, was being deliberately obstinate, or disingenuous wasnít very interesting.


I expect people are making the same choices with me when they decide whether to engage or not.


I hope that answers your question.


Now Dance Bear! Say something Interesting based on this! Give me food for thought, or I shall cast thee down into the forgotten ranks of Those Not Really Worth Bothering With.
  #297  
Old 06-29-2019, 11:37 PM
Scylla is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Posts: 16,390
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
...you literally quoted me. You quoted "the problem I had with what you said."
My ignorance. Yes. Understood. You are being tedious. Did you not understand that I was requesting you enlighten me?
  #298  
Old 06-30-2019, 12:08 AM
Banquet Bear's Avatar
Banquet Bear is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Wellington, New Zealand
Posts: 5,617
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
The rebuttal cited Wikipedia and then said that the 7% number was based on a study done in 1997 and never updated and is therefore useless or worthless.

What my article actually said was:

ďn the 1990s, the FBI clocked the rate of specious allegations at 8 percent, according to Turvey. A 2016 meta-analysis of seven studies found an average false reporting rate of 5 percent. In the mid-2000s, the Making a Difference (MAD) project crunched stats on 2,059 rapes and sexual assaults specifically reported to U.S. law enforcement, the only study to do so. MAD found a false allegation rate of 7 percent.

How many is that? According to the FBI, law enforcement agencies received 116,645 reports of rapes or sexual assaults in 2014, the most recent year for which comprehensive law enforcement statistics are available. Applying MADís 7 percent false reporting rate, thatís a total of 8,165 false reportsóor about 22 every day of the year.Ē

This one quote mentions 4 different studies going from the 1990s to 2014. I looked at the Wikipedia cite, and I didnít feel that their cite really said what they seemed to think it said.

I concluded that the person really hadnít read the article, said so, and moved on. The person then came back with something I didnít real feel was worth my time.

How did I make that determination? Personal judgement call. In the very best discussions Iíve had we tend to be focused on ideas. People will get the gist of what i am saying with just a few words because they are reading sympathetically and I am doing the same and we are trying to understand what the other is saying.

In some of the worst discussions, the people think it is a game to misinterpret, or not understand, or misread.

In this particular circumstance I looked at what my article said, what their rebuttal link said, and thought ďoh ok. We are playing that game. No thanks.Ē I moved on. I assumed other people who wanted to have a good progressive discussion would conclude what I had concluded.
...except 'this massive wall of text' you've just written isn't what actually happened.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Scylla View Post
Good article on the consequences of false rape allegations:

https://world.wng.org/2019/03/false_...s_ruined_lives

FBI puts the number as high as 7-8%. This, of course, is for the ones that are reported to the police. It doesnít include the ones that are made casually or just through the media
Quote:
Originally Posted by Banquet Bear View Post
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/False_...5%E2%80%931997)

...a dubious statistic that hasn't been updated since 1997.

LOL.
Did you see what actually happened? That person (who happened to have been me) wasn't addressing the article: they were addressing the numbers you pulled from the article. It doesn't matter what the article said. You quoted those figures here in this thread. I investigated the figures that you presented to us.

Quote:
So thatís why I did what I did.
What you've actually done is recontexualised what you did.

Fortunately all we need to do is scroll back a couple of pages to see what you actually did.

Quote:
You have concluded that my actions were unsatisfactory or hypocritical or something and are chiding me for them
Incorrect. I didn't chide you. I said they were notable.

Quote:
Ok. Letís talk about it.
No, lets not.

It took me less than a minute to investigate the FBI figures, something that both you and the author of the article you cited didn't bother to do. Strike One.

You then borrowed the "22 a day" figure, which was extrapolated from figures from the Making a Difference Project, something that I'm pretty sure the authors of the Making a Difference Project nor any self-respecting statistician would ever endorse. Strike Two.

I have no reason to believe that any other statistic used in the article hasn't been similarly manipulated/misinterpreted and I'm not going to run around checking their veracity. I've done your homework for you already. Link to the primary sources or forget about it: I don't trust your cite.

And it wasn't a "wikipedia arguement." It was Bruce Goss, PhD, JD, MBA, someone who, unlike you, has actually examined the data.

Quote:
There. Iíve now backtracked and wasted time Explaining myself and addressing something that anybody worth talking too should be able to see for themselves without my help.
Yep: you certainly did waste your time.

Quote:
I did that for you because you seemed to think it was bad that I didnít.
Not bad. Just worthy of noting.

Quote:
So please show me how this is interesting and noteworthy and how you are going to use it to exchange ideas in an interesting way or move the conversation along.
Please show me how pointing out that iiandyiiii not answering your question twice is interesting and noteworthy and how you are going to use it to exchange ideas in an interesting way or move the conversation along.

Quote:
If I stop responding and go on to something else, you will now know why.

***
Because you can't handle it when people prove that you've gotten something wrong?

Quote:
I will go a step further and anticipate a potential rebuttal. Something like ďScylla you are still a fucking hypocrite. You canít go ignoring stuff directed at you even if you think itís unworthy, while chiding Andy for not asking your questionsĒ

My answer would be that your right. I just choose where to invest my time and make a judgement. Andy is typically forthcoming and I thought my question interesting and worthy. I was asking him what his picture ideas for change were, and what he hoped to accomplish and how he would do it.
LOL. I hope you are having fun having a conversation with yourself.

Quote:
I thought that arguing about percentages that I had cited correctly from somebody who either wasnít bothering to read carefully, was being deliberately obstinate, or disingenuous wasnít very interesting.
For the third time: that person was me.

Are you just skimming the thread?

Quote:
I expect people are making the same choices with me when they decide whether to engage or not.
Indeed.

Quote:
I hope that answers your question.
The casual reader will note that I never asked Scylla a question.

Quote:
Now Dance Bear! Say something Interesting based on this! Give me food for thought, or I shall cast thee down into the forgotten ranks of Those Not Really Worth Bothering With.
You seem to be under the misapprehension that this thread is all about you.

Quote:
My ignorance. Yes. Understood. You are being tedious. Did you not understand that I was requesting you enlighten me?
I understood you perfectly. I just choose where to invest my time and make a judgement.
  #299  
Old 06-30-2019, 06:14 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
Here is where I answered Scylla's question about how the justice system needs to improve:

Quote:
But this is separate from how the justice system should improve WRT sexual assault and rape. In my understanding, they often treat accusers like suspects -- they drill down with hostility, rather than starting with compassion. And they include members of an inherently patriarchal culture -- usually men, but also women -- who so often see rape as only the stranger-in-a-bush variety... anything else must have been brought about by the accuser. What was she wearing? Is she promiscuous? Why did she go up to his apartment, or in the dressing room? Why did she flirt with him? Etc. None of that is actually relevant to whether she might have been raped, but it's used to browbeat accusers just the same. Those are the kinds of things that need to be improved.
So I identified some areas and behaviors that are bad and need to stop. Poysyn went into a lot more detail, since presumably she has some expertise that I do not. But I did answer that question, for the record.
  #300  
Old 06-30-2019, 06:15 AM
iiandyiiii's Avatar
iiandyiiii is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: Arlington, VA
Posts: 35,911
nm - duplicate

Last edited by iiandyiiii; 06-30-2019 at 06:16 AM.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 09:15 AM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017