David Moyes Slap

[StringerBell]

47 minutes ago, JoetheRam said:

There is no way the stat about 1 in 3 women being sexually assaulted by the time they are 25 is true.

Surely?

I'm not sure. 

I think what constitutes assault might be important here. The 1 in 5 at American universities is nonsense so I do find this hard to believe.

[Sith Happens]

41 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

I'm not sure. 

I think what constitutes assault might be important here. The 1 in 5 at American universities is nonsense so I do find this hard to believe.

 

Exactly the point, what does constitute a sexual assault?

I bet if you look at the definition of a sexual assault then probably most of us at some point man or woman have been the victim of one. I dare bet if you were out clubbing and grabbed or pinched a womans bum its a sexual assault...

On that basis in my younger years ive been sexually assaulted by women on more than one occasion, and not always just the bum, in fact not just younger years. But as always i guess its not considered as serious when its a woman against a man. Maybe men have a different outlook on things, women may find it an assault, i dare bet most men in the same circumstances would probably have a bit of a ego boost by it.

Probably 20 years ago if someone did that it would be an annoyance more than anything, but considered more serious now.

Not saying i would do it or condone it....but maybe that wouild explain the high numbers..

 

[McRainy]

If you bothered to look at the evidence you would see that the figures are for sexual violence.

You would also see that only 15% of rapes get reported and of those that are, just over 5% result in convictions. 

I'm not going to argue the point because the figures speak for themselves. In all likelihood the real figures will be higher, given the low reporting rate. 

[GboroRam]

17 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

If you bothered to look at the evidence you would see that the figures are for sexual violence.

You would also see that only 15% of rapes get reported and of those that are, just over 5% result in convictions. 

I'm not going to argue the point because the figures speak for themselves. In all likelihood the real figures will be higher, given the low reporting rate. 

Unfortunately some people are too interested in their own perceived injustices and don't want to acknowledge real ones that don't affect them.

[McRainy]

9 minutes ago, GboroRam said:

Unfortunately some people are too interested in their own perceived injustices and don't want to acknowledge real ones that don't affect them.

Nail on head. 

[Wolfie]

18 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

If you bothered to look at the evidence you would see that the figures are for sexual violence.

You would also see that only 15% of rapes get reported and of those that are, just over 5% result in convictions. 

I'm not going to argue the point because the figures speak for themselves. In all likelihood the real figures will be higher, given the low reporting rate. 

These are the stats I have a problem with:

Only 5.7% of rapes reported result in a conviction. It annoys me no end every time this is quoted because there is the assumption that an accused rapist is always guilty and are getting away with it. What percentage should it be?. 20%, 50%, 100%?. It's a meaningless argument because none of us know what the actual guilty ratio should be.

[StringerBell]

1 hour ago, IlsonDerby said:

There isn't a single country in the world where women are paid equally to men. That's alarming in 2017. 

That isn't liberals being too sensitive, that isn't political correctness gone mad. This is a problem. When I have children if I have a daughter I want her to grow up in a world that provides equal opportunities to her as a male with her attributes would have. 

Well there's the UK. Several others in the west.

Did you mean women as a group aren't paid equally? Well liberal societies don't provide group rights they provide individual rights. 

This is a good thing.

[IlsonDerby]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

We should shy away from it if it's impossible. There will always be crime in a free society. Goals designed to completely eradicate crime must curtail freedoms.

Which young males in particular do we need to educate about consent? And why just males?

Police are taught to automatically believe purported victims of sexual assault, which is wrong. If they are asked what they are wearing and it's not relevant then that's wrong but if they want to know for purposes of gathering evidence it's fine. Regardless, It's not an injustice on par with automatically believing someone as that goes against the tenet of being innocent until proven guilty.

 

I said near impossible. It is possible if people put in enough effort and be proactive rather than reactive. Not being able to sexually abuse a woman is something I'd be happy to lose a degree of freedom for. If you aren't then I'm sure that speaks volumes in itself...

Because statistically females are likely to be sexually assaulted by males, but good point lets educate every one at secondary school about consent and respecting females and males equally. 

The police should believe the victims otherwise the case loses integrity, at no point did I say anything about seeing an alleged rapist as guilty without fair trial. My point was moving away from the fixation of 'how could the girl have avoided it?' We need to change that to 'how can we educate people so girls don't have to go out of their way to avoid it?' 

[IlsonDerby]

3 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

Well there's the UK. Several others in the west.

Did you mean women as a group aren't paid equally? Well liberal societies don't provide group rights they provide individual rights. 

This is a good thing.

for the same work, women are on average paid less than men. This includes taking into account women having time off for maternity. When all external factors are removed there is still a gender pay gap and that isn't right.

[StringerBell]

42 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said:

for the same work, women are on average paid less than men. This includes taking into account women having time off for maternity. When all external factors are removed there is still a gender pay gap and that isn't right.

By something like 2%?

No economist takes the pay gap seriously.

'On average' - so it's not a problem with individual people being discriminated against then. So why should anyone care?People are individuals. Women earn less on average because women choose to earn less on average. When someone decides to be a teacher rather than an astrophysicist they choose to earn less.

Paid less for the same work? Not if they're on a wage as that would be illegal. If it's a salary - salaries are negotiated. You would expect to see a disparity in a free society. When all the bars in a chart add up exactly 50/50 then that's when you should suspect there's a problem.

[McRainy]

18 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

By something like 2%?

Over 18% as shown in the government link above. 

Your argument about women choosing to earn less assumes a level playing field, which isn't the case, educationally, socially or in terms of employment opportunity. 

[McRainy]

1 hour ago, Wolfie said:

These are the stats I have a problem with:

Only 5.7% of rapes reported result in a conviction. It annoys me no end every time this is quoted because there is the assumption that an accused rapist is always guilty and are getting away with it. What percentage should it be?. 20%, 50%, 100%?. It's a meaningless argument because none of us know what the actual guilty ratio should be.

The overall conviction rate is 84%. 

It is notoriously difficult to get a conviction for rape, which is why so few are actually reported. 

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/592058/criminal-justice-statistics-quarterly-update-september-2016.pdf

[StringerBell]

2 hours ago, IlsonDerby said:

I said near impossible. It is possible if people put in enough effort and be proactive rather than reactive. Not being able to sexually abuse a woman is something I'd be happy to lose a degree of freedom for. If you aren't then I'm sure that speaks volumes in itself...

Oh really. It probably speaks volumes about Benjamin Franklin as well then. "Those who would give up essential Liberty, to purchase a little temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."

2 hours ago, IlsonDerby said:

 

Because statistically females are likely to be sexually assaulted by males, but good point lets educate every one at secondary school about consent and respecting females and males equally. 

 

There are plans to introduce this. Do all children need to have this taught? University students are now expected to attend consent classes and a number object to this. I wouldn't want to be sent to a consent class just as I wouldn't want to be sent to a 'murder is bad' class. Most rapists know it's wrong.

2 hours ago, IlsonDerby said:

 

 

The police should believe the victims otherwise the case loses integrity, at no point did I say anything about seeing an alleged rapist as guilty without fair trial. My point was moving away from the fixation of 'how could the girl have avoided it?' We need to change that to 'how can we educate people so girls don't have to go out of their way to avoid it?' 

No the police should be objective and act without prejudice. 

Fixating on how the girl could have avoided it might help the girl avoid it. That's not victim blaming or anything like that, it's taking precautions. I also avoid putting myself in precarious situations. 

[StringerBell]

52 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

Over 18% as shown in the government link above. 

Your argument about women choosing to earn less assumes a level playing field, which isn't the case, educationally, socially or in terms of employment opportunity. 

Indeed young women are now more likely to go to university and working class, white boys are those who achieve the least.

Social engineering ftw.

[McRainy]

5 minutes ago, StringerBell said:

That's not victim blaming or anything like that, it's taking precautions. 

So women should have to 'take precautions' to accommodate some spurious notion of male liberty?

But that's not patriarchy?

[IlsonDerby]

1 hour ago, StringerBell said:

By something like 2%?

No economist takes the pay gap seriously.

'On average' - so it's not a problem with individual people being discriminated against then. So why should anyone care?People are individuals. Women earn less on average because women choose to earn less on average. When someone decides to be a teacher rather than an astrophysicist they choose to earn less.

Paid less for the same work? Not if they're on a wage as that would be illegal. If it's a salary - salaries are negotiated. You would expect to see a disparity in a free society. When all the bars in a chart add up exactly 50/50 then that's when you should suspect there's a problem.

All of your arguments are quite easy for a male to say. I wonder whether this would be your attitude if you were on the other side of it? 

[McRainy]

Just now, StringerBell said:

working class, white boys are those who achieve the least.

According to your argument they are simply choosing not to succeed. 

[StringerBell]

2 minutes ago, Lambchop said:

So women should have to 'take precautions' to accommodate some spurious notion of male liberty?

But that's not patriarchy?

No. That's life.

[StringerBell]

Just now, Lambchop said:

According to your argument they are simply choosing not to succeed. 

Or others are being given a leg up.

[StringerBell]

5 minutes ago, IlsonDerby said:

All of your arguments are quite easy for a male to say. I wonder whether this would be your attitude if you were on the other side of it? 

There are plenty of women who don't see themselves as victims. Camille Paglia and Christina Hoff Sommers to mention two.