this post was submitted on 15 Mar 2025
1 points (100.0% liked)

NonCredibleDefense

3887 readers
8 users here now

Rules:

  1. Posts must abide by lemmy.world terms and conditions
  2. No spam or soliciting for money.
  3. No racism or other bigotry allowed.
  4. Obviously nothing illegal.

If you see these please report them.

Related communities:

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
[email protected]
1
Understandable, we should pay up (lemmy.world)
submitted 23 hours ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
55 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] [email protected] 0 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I’ve specified differences between 2022 and 1944 few times above how they may apply differently to the two eras and situation, particularly the marital part, I don’t think I need to repeat myself about it.

Unless you think marital rape was a major problem amongst American GIs in France from 1944-1945, it's not really a salient point.

Now, have you read the book?

Yes, actually. It has its problems, but the estimation of the number of rapes performed by GIs in France is not in dispute here; we are accepting it for the sake of the argument and as the citation given, the implication thereof which is being disputed.

Correct and I’m not the one comparing apples to oranges here.

How can you say a point is outlandish if you can’t even dispute the basis of the assertion?

Mea culpa, you’ve just responded to it and seem to be quoting the numbers from it:

I quoted the wiki article because the wiki article was what was offered by the original commenter, and was the implication that I was refuting. Jesus H. Christ.

Those numbers say nothing about the actual safety of a French woman now vs. WW2.

Which means your point is "We don't know and we can't know because evidence doesn't exist", which is utterly worthless as a contribution to the discussion.

So, uh, thanks, I guess.

But this is getting a little boring at this point. Just use a contemporary comparison next time and then you won’t give off the impression of someone trivializing war associated sexual violence.

I love that you offer both "Numbers are meaningless" and "You should've used contemporary numbers instead!"

Of course, if I did, then your argument would doubtlessly be "But contemporary definitions of rape don't include acts we include in modern definitions of rape, therefore, it's incomparable and my preconception remains untarnished by evidence."

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

Unless you think marital rape was a major problem amongst American GIs in France from 1944-1945, it’s not really a salient point.

Bravo, you've found the difference!

Yes, actually. It has its problems, but the estimation of the number of rapes performed by GIs in France is not in dispute here;

The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.

“We don’t know and we can’t know because evidence doesn’t exist” / "Numbers are meaningless” and “You should’ve used contemporary numbers instead!” / your argument would doubtlessly be “But contemporary definitions of rape don’t include acts we include in modern definitions of rape, therefore, it’s incomparable and my preconception remains untarnished by evidence.”

Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between "use comparable metrics FFS" and "numbers are useless".

[–] [email protected] 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Bravo, you’ve found the difference!

If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up. As we are concerned with actual rapes committed, and not arbitrarily excluding rapes because of legal definitions, it makes no sense to try to claim the lack of marital rape recognized by contemporary law to be at all relevant.

The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.

Yet you aren't disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape. Yet in your dispute of the definitions, you manage to define literally nothing that would create substantial discontinuity between the statistics being compared.

Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between “use comparable metrics FFS” and “numbers are useless”.

Comparable metrics like "Rape per capita" and "rape per capita".

But sure, go back to claiming that the numbers are wrong, and that I've inflated them fivefold, and then backtrack and completely reverse your argument into a dismissal of the applicability of those numbers once it turns out that the numbers are valid and are against your argument, not in support of it.

Pathetic.

[–] [email protected] 0 points 3 hours ago

If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up.

Yet you aren’t disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape.

Comparable metrics like “Rape per capita” and “rape per capita”.

Since 1944 rape was legally redefined and expanded 5-6 times in both France and England (i prefer not to get into the details...), some of the laws and significant societal changes, actual policing standards changed even after this book was written (2001) and published (2007). Even the non-conflict related stats have a disclaimer about cultural and legal differences limiting direct comparison, but most importantly the UN considers conflict-related sexual violence as its own distinct category (again you've compared conflict vs non-conflict stats).

But at this point I'll give in to your logic and conclude this discussion with this graph which clearly indicates "that by those numbers, it would be much safer to be a woman with an English man in 2007, than to be a woman with an English man in 2022."

https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/sexualoffencesinenglandandwalesoverview/march2022