T1B

Left Seater wrote:

Jsc810 wrote:Women and physicians will handle it just fine without you.

Thanks for making my point. As you pointed out others besides the physicians will be involved so it isn't just a medical procedure between a woman and her physician.

Hell, Cali and PP want to remove those with a medical degree from the equation altogether.

Left Seater wrote:Van the reason is because Planned Parenthood and other abortion providers are trying to move away from Dr involvement.

PP wants midwives to be able to preform the procedure.

Please tell me you knew that staffers at PP are not Drs nor are the vast majority even nurses. You and Jsc said this should be a decision between a woman and her Dr, but in most cases it is a decision between a woman and an uneducated staffer.

popart wrote:Why would a population that is known (supposedly) to be not much interested in reporting rapes, somehow ALL freely open up to strangers (the OJoOG) about the rapes which are happening to them?

poptart wrote:Victimization surveys?

Ahhh...
The sound of shit being pulled from deep from within the ass.



If rapes are not reported, how do you know they are occurring in huge numbers?

Kreskin?
Carnac?



Why would a population that is known (supposedly) to be not much interested in reporting rapes, somehow ALL freely open up to strangers (the OJoOG) about the rapes which are happening to them?

poptart wrote:
Maybe if we could ask the men involved in those situations, they'd say, "Rape? Huh? WTF are you talking about?"


All chatter.

Python wrote:That matches what I came up with too.

M Club, responding incredulously to yet another popfart, wrote:Really, you're that dense?

Van wrote:

M Club, responding incredulously to yet another popfart, wrote:Really, you're that dense?

I take it you've never checked out the Theology forum.

M Club wrote:please tell me you understand the difference between ticking a box in response to "Have you ever been the victim of a sexual assault?" and going to the police to start the drawn out legal process against someone you statistically already know, not to mention there's a decent chance you're not even 18 yet.

poptart wrote:Maybe if we could ask the men involved in those situations, they'd say, "Rape? Huh? WTF are you talking about?"

M Club wrote:think this comment speaks more the culture of rape you subscribe to than anything else. figures, christian and all.

Van wrote:You're right. It's probably much higher than that.

poptart wrote:

M Club wrote:please tell me you understand the difference between ticking a box in response to "Have you ever been the victim of a sexual assault?" and going to the police to start the drawn out legal process against someone you statistically already know, not to mention there's a decent chance you're not even 18 yet.

Please tell me you don't realize that an incident reported to police is a VERIFIABLE incident, and a check in a box on a piece of paper is... a check in a box on a piece of paper.

poptart wrote:Maybe if we could ask the men involved in those situations, they'd say, "Rape? Huh? WTF are you talking about?"

M Club wrote:think this comment speaks more the culture of rape you subscribe to than anything else. figures, christian and all.

It's basic common sense.

Why do you choose to automatically assume that a rape really occurred - without hearing what the accused would have to say about the supposed incident?

Seriously, you're a very foolish man.


I have no doubt that rapes occur at a higher rate than the official rate.

But six or seven times that rate?

lol

No.

M Club wrote:Curious that academics also utilize victimization surveys

mvscal wrote:Based on what?

Smackie Chan wrote:I don't think you or anyone else would argue against the assertion that rape is substantially underreported.

How would you or anyone else know with any degree of certainty? It is a basic logical fallacy.

Van wrote:

mvscal wrote:Based on what?

Based on the same hunch you're using here...

mvscal wrote:How would you or anyone else know with any degree of certainty?

Van wrote:I quoted the wrong thing. It's now corrected.

Van wrote:I now stand corrected.

M Club wrote:Please explain to us why official data used to describe the prevelance of rape and whether or not it's actually reported is less accurate than the feeling you have.

Van wrote:The hunch is based on the fact that women are afraid to report being raped.

Jsc wrote:It should be a woman's right to choose. Period.

It is repulsive enough that some people want to dictate what a woman can and can't do.

poptart wrote:Let's assume that the numbers Van cited are valid and that 32,000 rape victims become pregnant each year.

It's cited in that same survey that 60% of these currently end up aborted - almost 20,000.

So we have 12,000 raped women a year that would be forced to carry to term if Akin had his way.

But we know that if abortion was illegal, what half or more of these women would abort illegally, anyway?

So we're down to around 6,000 rape victims a year who would be forced to carry to term if Akin had his way.


Shit, you ridiculous freaks, that many living fetuses are SLAUGHTERED in just two days.

Two friggin' days. lol

Van wrote:I understand logic perfectly well.

Jsc810 wrote:Please respond to my hypothetical question above regarding the sick child who needs a kidney transplant.

Van wrote:Yes, it does. It speaks to the issue of forcing a woman to do things with her body that are against her will.

Van wrote:Being forced to have a baby when she doesn't want to is forcing her to do something with her body against her will. Quit spinning.

Van wrote:No, I didn't acknowledge that it's a baby,

Van wrote:Forcing her to have a baby when she doesn't want to

mvscal wrote:

Van wrote:No, I didn't acknowledge that it's a baby,

Of course you did

Van wrote:Forcing her to have a baby when she doesn't want to

And, yes, society most certainly has a say when it comes to destroying human life. In fact, ensuring that human life is not being wantonly or unlawfully destroyed is the most fundamental responsibility of any society.

poptart wrote: Official data??

lol

That'd be a thing called a POLICE REPORT.

The majority of sexual assaults are not reported to the authorities.

The Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) reports that the majority of rapes and sexual assaults perpetrated against women and girls in the United States between 1992 and 2000 were not reported to the police. Only 36 percent of rapes, 34 percent of attempted rapes, and 26 percent of sexual assaults were reported. [3] Reasons for not reporting assault vary among individuals, but one study identified the following as common: [4]

Self-blame or guilt.
Shame, embarrassment, or desire to keep the assault a private matter.
Humiliation or fear of the perpetrator or other individual's perceptions.
Fear of not being believed or of being accused of playing a role in the crime.
Lack of trust in the criminal justice system.

In the NIJ funded Sexual Assault Among Latinas Study (SALAS), it was found that victims did not commonly seek help from the criminal justice system, but did seek informal sources of help such as family and friends. However, one third of the women included in the study did not report their victimization to anyone.

Because many law enforcement officers have powers of discretion, they have the ability to affect how much crime is recorded based on how they record their activities.

Even though a member of the public may report a crime to a law enforcement officer, it will not be counted unless that crime is then recorded in a way that allows it to be incorporated into the crime statistics. As a consequence, offending, particularly minor offending, may be significantly under counted in situations where law enforcement officers are overloaded with work or do not perceive the offending as worth recording.

Similarly certain high profile categories of crime may be well reported when there is an incentive (such as a financial or performance incentive) for the law enforcement officer to do so.

Because of the difficulties in quantifying how much crime actually occurs, researchers generally take two approaches to gathering statistics about crime.

Statistics from law enforcement organisations are often used. These statistics are normally readily available and are generally reliable in terms of identifying what crime is being dealt with by law enforcement organisations, as they are gathered by law enforcement officers in the course of their duties and are often extracted directly from law enforcement computer systems.

However, these statistics often tend to reflect the productivity and law enforcement activities of the officers concerned and may bear little relationship to the actual amount of crime, as officers can only record crime that comes to their attention and might not record a matter as a crime if the matter is considered minor and is not perceived as a crime by the officer concerned. The statistics may also be biased because of routine actions and pragmatic decisions that law enforcement officers make in the field.

For example, when faced with a domestic violence dispute between a couple, a law enforcement officer may decide it is far less trouble to arrest the male party to the dispute, because the female may have children to care for, despite both parties being equally culpable for the dispute. This sort of pragmatic decisionmaking asked if they are victims of crime, without needing to provide any supporting evidence. In these surveys it is the participant's perception, or opinion, that a crime occurred, or even their understanding about what constitutes a crime that is being measured.

As a consequence victimisation surveys can also exhibit a subjective bias. Also, differing methodologies may make comparisons with other surveys difficult.

One way in which victimisation surveys are useful is that they show some types of crime are well reported to law enforcement officials, while other types of crime are under reported. These surveys also give insights as to why crime is reported, or not. The surveys show that the need to make an insurance claim, seek medical assistance, and the seriousness of an offence tend to increase the level of reporting, while the inconvenience of reporting, the involvement of intimate parters and the nature of the offending tend to decrease reporting.

This allows degrees of confidence to be assigned to various crime statistics. For example: Motor vehicle thefts are generally well reported because the victim may need to make the report for an insurance claim, while domestic violence, domestic child abuse and sexual offences are frequently significantly under-reported because of the intimate relationships involved, embarrassment and other factors that make it difficult for the victim to make a report.

poptart wrote:I didn't say that I have unshakable faith in the police.

I DID say that police reports are the OFFICIAL DATA we have.

You and Van are involved in speculation - with Van going so far as to say that rapes are occurring at more than 7 times the reported rate.

His evidence of that is frantic hand-wavy gestures.

Your prostitution example is not good, M Club.

There is no victim in prostitution, hence there is very seldom any reason why it should be reported.