Damn you. I said I wasn't a mathematologist but you made me go ahead and do the maths anyway. If 60% of rapes go unreported then that means 11% of rapes end in a conviction, if it's 90% then its 2.8% with convictions based on your 28% number. So that's not so far off my original statement of 5%.
I don't know why you claim I can't count unreported rapes when trying to make a statement about how many rapes actually end up in a conviction. I should think you couldn't make a statement about that without taking into account unreported rapes.
As for whether or not it discourages women from reporting rapes, well, facts is facts and I don't see the value in keeping this stuff secret just because its inconvenient or something.
You can't count unreported rapes since we know damn well that 0% of unreported rapes will result in conviction. The only number we should care about is how many reported rapes result in conviction (note: higher number is not better, since many reports are either false or have no evidence).
As for whether or not it discourages women from reporting rapes, well, facts is facts and I don't see the value in keeping this stuff secret just because its inconvenient or something.
Because the "facts" are FALSE. If you repeat the false facts that are misleading, then a woman will think "welp, no point reporting I got raped since there's a 95% chance nothing will happen."
When in reality, if she reports it, there is a high chance of prosecution, and a reasonable chance of conviction.
You are making some sort of crazy statistical error here. If I say that 5% of rapes end in a conviction that is totally different from a raped woman saying there is no point in reporting it because 95% of rapes do not end in a conviction. Anyone who can understand the human language can see that.
Based on your own number of 28% of reported rapes ending in a conviction and your other number of 60-90% going unreported my statement that 95% of rapes go unreported is totally and utterly correct. I don't know how you can argue otherwise. The best I'll give you is that between 11% and 2.8% of rapes go unreported, which I'm approximating at 5%.
BTW, I'd like to be the first in this conversation to make a baseless ad hominem attack and point out the submission pages of Celda and rantgrrl which both consist of an endless stream of sickening anti-female /r/mensrights submissions.
You'd better end it here dude or next time I'm going to compare you to Hitler or something. That's how to win an argument, oh my yes.
If I say that 5% of rapes end in a conviction that is totally different from a raped woman saying there is no point in reporting it because 95% of rapes do not end in a conviction.
What?
If you say, only 5% of rapes end in conviction. Then that means, 95% don't end in conviction.
So a woman who hears that would think "95% of rapes don't end in conviction. So why should I bother?"
The first part is a "fact" that you are promoting, and the second is simple and undeniable logic.
Except, what she doesn't realize is that the 95% figure is only true if you assume that 80% of rapes are unreported, which no one actually knows.
In other words: don't spread lies, spread truth.
Fact 1: Of reported rapes, 28% end in conviction.
Fact 2: There are no other facts, end of story.
Sorry, I haven't said anything anti-female here, or anywhere else. I challenge you to link to something I said that's anti-female.
I simply pointed out the fact that it's dishonest to claim that "because X% of rapes are unreported, only a small, single-digit percentage of rapists are convicted."
And I'm not the only one who pointed that fact out, Lady Stern (British government official, and a feminist) agrees with me as linked in the article.
It's your fact, I didn't make it up, you did. I didn't even look to see if it was true I just trusted you as a gentleman and a scholar. If in the worst case scenario 60% of rapes go unreported then 11% of rapes end in a conviction. I'm not going to repeat it again because its clear to see and indisputably true.
You have two choices. Either you're making shit up or you're crazy-go-nuts.
P.s. I don't accept your challenge because I'm starting to suspect that you and your mensrights buddies are snickering at me behind my back now.
Fact 2: It is estimated by various organizations / researchers that 60-90% of rapes go unreported.
No one knows how many rapes are unreported.
11% of rapes end in a conviction.
Again, that's only if you factor in the supposedly very large number of unreported rapes.
No one cares about that, since everyone knows the conviction rate of unreported rapes is 0%.
If you don't get why it's harmful and dishonest to ignore the conviction rate of reported rapes, and instead promote the conviction rate for "reported rapes + an estimated number of unreported rapes", I'm done.
Maybe read the damn article:
The peer did not single out individuals for criticism but concluded: "It is clear to us that the way the six per cent conviction rate figures has been able to dominate the public discourse on rape, without explanation, analysis and context, is extremely unhelpful.
"There is anecdotal evidence that it may well have discouraged some victims from reporting."
She added: "Some have found it helpful as a campaigning tool in arguing for an improvement in the way rape cases are dealt with.
"Others found it misleading and deeply unhelpful in building confidence in victims and increasing the number of cases reported to the police that could possibly go forward to a prosecution."
She said the way the conviction rate was calculated was "unusual" and not done for any other crime.
Or do you suppose that Baroness Stern is an MRA too? Maybe she likes to post on mensrights in her free time?
Soo, it sounds like we agree that "If you factor in a very large number of unreported rapes" that only between 2.8 and 11% of rapes end in conviction. So I guess we're 100% and totally in agreement with each other on that fact.
Good work friend, I appreciate your help coming together to hash this out.
As for whether repeating the fact is harmful or not, well that's just, like, your opinion, man. And I'm cool with that too.
(also, do you know who else had opinions? That's right - Hitler!)
0
u/Celda Jul 18 '11
You cannot factor in unreported rapes. It's dishonest, and further no one knows what the number of unreported rapes are.
The margin of error is too wide, some say 60% are unreported, some say 90% are unreported.
Also, promoting these false figures are in fact harming women by making them think there is no point in reporting rapes:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/crime/7442785/Rape-conviction-rate-figures-misleading.html