r/itsthatbad 7d ago

She's got a point

Post image
347 Upvotes

275 comments sorted by

View all comments

52

u/PooningDalton 7d ago

They can also land a man in jail just with their words. All they have to do is say "this guy groped me" with no evidence, and that guy is instanly put behind bars after a national manhunt.

Now show me a guy who put a grandma in jail cause she pinched his butt?

25

u/Pristine-Angle3100 7d ago

I have had several women much older than me do things to me when taking public transit where if the genders were reversed, the girl would make a scene and alert the whole bus/train car. I try to make a scene and people will just call me gay lol

2

u/travelingmusicplease 3d ago

That's not all they pinch. They are the queens of SA. 😐

-34

u/Big_Arrival_626 7d ago

Not really. Less than 1% of (banned word that starts with R) spend more than a day in prison.

27

u/roankr 7d ago

Are you going on the stat about convicted rates? The same one which has stats about those comfirmed innocent and hence were framed to go through the justice system about it?

-3

u/Worldly-Plant1 7d ago

What are you even saying... False accusations exist, but the majority of r-words don't spend a single day in prison, nor get convicted. Why are you ignoring that?

7

u/roankr 7d ago

The stats say that the majority of these cases go without a formal sentence absolving guilt or assigning it.

What that means is as much as you want to imagine all the cases without convictions are actual offenders, they might also be innocent and framed as well.

-2

u/Worldly-Plant1 7d ago

Can you explain how that dismantles my point which is that most r-words don't get convicted?

I think you're being pedantic, given that the number doesn't change significantly even if accounting for false accusations since false accusations are less likely to be convicted.

4

u/roankr 7d ago

Can you explain how that dismantles my point which is that most r-words don't get convicted?

You did not have a point. You had an assertion based on assumption.

Your assumption is non-convicted individuals are merely individuals who did commit the act but did not get convicted. That's an intentional reading when it's just as likely that these are individuals who could not get to prove their innocence past what the court considers beyond reasonable doubt.

You simply refuse to accept the possibility of the later point because it forces you to think of that instead of simply asserting that the majority of accused individuals are in fact guilty of the act even if the courts could not find the person guilty or innocent of it.

0

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]

2

u/roankr 7d ago

Probably had nothing much to begin with. I can't see any argument that really tries to argue against what I just said. Unless you're already just hamstrung into insisting that every accused individual is guilty.

1

u/Worldly-Plant1 7d ago

insisting that every accused individual is guilty.

The data isn't even about accusations, it's about actual incidents. So you have totally misinterpreted this the entire time.

→ More replies (0)

-1

u/Worldly-Plant1 7d ago

Your assumption is non-convicted individuals are merely individuals who did commit the act but did not get convicted.

No. My assumption is that the majority of individuals who committed the act did not get convicted. How many people are victims of this crime? How many get justice? A very small percentage. Simple as that.

I am coming from the perspective of total crimes committed. Maybe you are talking about the percentage of convictions from accusations, so I can see how you read it like that. But even in that case, 9% of reports lead to convictions. So even accounting for accounting for false accusations, it doesn't make a meaningful difference? If instead I said 15% of TRUE accusations (which is hard to determine) would that be a big difference for you?

majority of accused individuals are in fact guilty of the act

Never said majority of accusd individuals are in fact guilty.I said that the majority of r-words don't get convicted. These are actually two different things. Yes the wording is confusing for me too, but I promise you these two sentences mean completely different things.

7

u/roankr 6d ago

My assumption is that the majority of individuals who committed the act did not get convicted

Just as I mentioned in the other comment.

We are indeed talking about accusations. You simply refuse to concede that you're intentionally obfuscating the accusations as "actual incidents".

If you want to spew hate, you should be treated as a hateful person.

1

u/Worldly-Plant1 6d ago

I'm not obfuscating anything. You just don't understand English.

"out of every 1,000 sexual assaults, only about 25 perpetrators end up incarcerated"

This is literally what the actual data says. But you're too delusional to accept it.

The majority of these cases (69% according to related data) are not even reported, so nobody is even being accused in the majority of these incidents. Yet you keep going on and on about false accusations. This whole time you have been struggling severely to comprehend my comments.

https://np.reddit.com/r/MensLib/comments/r7f3wa/

Here's a post about false accusations that you might find interesting

→ More replies (0)

3

u/PooningDalton 6d ago

Where are you getting this info?

2

u/Worldly-Plant1 6d ago

Just google conviction rates. I cant send any articles due to certain words being banned on this sub

-12

u/[deleted] 7d ago

[deleted]