General Discussion

BainsBane

(53,032 posts)

36. You aren't even trying to deal with this issue seriously

Mon May 19, 2014, 02:04 AM

May 2014

Last edited Mon May 19, 2014, 03:55 AM - Edit history (1)

So don't play. You couldn't even bother to look up a single article on the subject for this OP. This involves human lives, millions of women, children, and men whose lives are devastated. I'm not subjecting this issue or a discussion of those survivors to your ridicule.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

182 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Porn. Rape? [View all] MannyGoldstein May 2014 OP

Link please. sheshe2 May 2014 #1

here: MannyGoldstein May 2014 #2

Wow. You nailed it. Just like this. BainsBane May 2014 #3

Did you not understand what I wrote in my post? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #4

It proves no more than my chart does BainsBane May 2014 #6

if anything, stats on reporting should have gone up even if the actual number stayed the same yurbud May 2014 #12

You are either purposely obtuse, MannyGoldstein May 2014 #13

More from your link.*****Trigger Warning************ sheshe2 May 2014 #17

Are you claiming that I, in any way, commend or enable this sickness? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #22

I went to your link Manny. sheshe2 May 2014 #23

That's ridiculous. It's government data. MannyGoldstein May 2014 #24

Wow. Nuclear Unicorn May 2014 #46

+1 Kurska May 2014 #52

Relic of the Clinton era? n/t LadyHawkAZ May 2014 #131

I have to agree with Manny on this one. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #56

Moi aussi, er, me too! rock May 2014 #75

Wait a minute... rrneck May 2014 #81

The *****Trigger Warning************ is MannyGoldstein May 2014 #154

If you are arguing correlation does not cause causation Harmony Blue May 2014 #7

like all violent crime, it has declined due to demographic changes BainsBane May 2014 #9

The percentage of young men has dropped by 80%? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #15

You aren't even trying to deal with this issue seriously BainsBane May 2014 #36

Certainly, we can agree on something: MannyGoldstein May 2014 #107

My understanding of crime statistics gollygee May 2014 #41

Question if I may? Sissyk May 2014 #132

Well obviously gollygee May 2014 #133

Freakonomics? Seriously? markpkessinger May 2014 #167

That's ironic gollygee May 2014 #175

No, it isn't the same at all... markpkessinger May 2014 #181

that chart doesn't make any sense d_r May 2014 #25

Wow. Thanks, I guess BainsBane May 2014 #35

HOW DARE YOU QUESTION THE SACRED SCRIPTURES Warren DeMontague May 2014 #38

neither of the charts account for recent increase in pirates off the African coast maggiesfarmer May 2014 #163

I know, right nt d_r May 2014 #168

Here let me explain a basic stats concepts to you. Kurska May 2014 #48

Maybe you should leave the stats explanations to people who know the first thing about statistics. DanTex May 2014 #58

So it's not just your OP's where you talk down to people Capt. Obvious May 2014 #60

Statistical illiteracy is a pet peeve of mine. DanTex May 2014 #63

Then you should work at it MannyGoldstein May 2014 #64

Really? LOL. Doubling down on innumeracy? DanTex May 2014 #66

Bonus points for using "innumeracy" on the 40th anniversary of Rubik's Cube. riqster May 2014 #112

Except, you're wrong about what you said you know n/t Kurska May 2014 #69

Can you name a few instances with there's causation, but very strong observed anticorrelation? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #65

Sure. Here's one just for you. DanTex May 2014 #67

You'd better tell the American Medical Association that they're wrong, and quick! MannyGoldstein May 2014 #73

Sigh. I think you'd be better off having Kurska fight your battles for you. DanTex May 2014 #79

"obesity reduces life expectancy" MannyGoldstein May 2014 #83

Umm, that JAMA study you linked to, for one... DanTex May 2014 #89

I find this kind of funny, given that BMI isn't even a good measure of obesity. Kurska May 2014 #90

Sure, that's fine, but the increased mortality even shows up using BMI, evidently. DanTex May 2014 #93

It isn't a weak measure, it is a bad measure. Kurska May 2014 #96

Overweight people had reduced mortality compared to "normals" MannyGoldstein May 2014 #104

The population-level correlation is actually very large. Did you look at those charts? DanTex May 2014 #114

Alright I'm taking the gloves off. Kurska May 2014 #74

Splashing up some graphs of long-term trends is useless. DanTex May 2014 #77

National trends aren't useless information. Kurska May 2014 #80

Not always, but in this case it probably is. DanTex May 2014 #91

Except he never claimed it was causing a decrease in rapes. Also you just used the P word wrong. Kurska May 2014 #95

Yes, the problem is that this isn't "good evidence" of anything. DanTex May 2014 #99

We have a massive increase in porn consumption nationally. Kurska May 2014 #101

I don't think it's "good evidence" of anything. DanTex May 2014 #106

I agree, there really is only one worthy take home from this information. Kurska May 2014 #110

And MannyGoldstein May 2014 #148

He seems to be conflating what you said and the what the OP said. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #82

You're right that certainly does seem to be the case Kurska May 2014 #87

Actually, I'm right about causation not requiring correlation. DanTex May 2014 #115

positive or negative correlation is still correlation. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #120

What are you talking about? What nitpicking? DanTex May 2014 #121

Righto, give me one example of Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #122

Umm, measured correlations hardly ever come out to exactly 0, causation or not. DanTex May 2014 #125

That's funny, because I found the exact same link. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #127

You've had statistics courses? Hmm. I guess you didn't get far enough to cover "correlation". DanTex May 2014 #130

And btw, the first link I found that claims what you're saying Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #126

No it doesn't hinge on a "choice" of definition. It's *the* definition of correlation. DanTex May 2014 #128

If you reduce any system to just two variables in a causal relationship. Kurska May 2014 #160

A correlation is a precisely defined bivariate statistic, it's not some vague term. DanTex May 2014 #166

Wow did you even read my entire post? Kurska May 2014 #68

I believe he knows more than you Capt. Obvious May 2014 #72

Yes, I did. DanTex May 2014 #76

Jesus, I never said it proved squat. Kurska May 2014 #78

And I quote: "That is why the argument he is making here is valid." DanTex May 2014 #97

I probably should have said "worthy of consideration" Kurska May 2014 #98

OK, I think we understand each other by now. DanTex May 2014 #100

I do believe you had valid concerns. I'm happy I could help address them. Kurska May 2014 #102

Which is probably why the OP didn't say it proved anything tkmorris May 2014 #84

But did Manny sound as smart when he said it? Capt. Obvious May 2014 #88

Well, he did say that it "seems to counter" a link between rape and porn. DanTex May 2014 #119

It either has a pretty small effect compared to other factors, MannyGoldstein May 2014 #149

That's true, but does/did anyone really believe that porn is the primary cause of rape? DanTex May 2014 #153

... MannyGoldstein May 2014 #158

+1 for statistics. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #71

nicely done Vattel May 2014 #161

I predict much wailing and gnashing of teeth ... 1000words May 2014 #5

Have a beer and some popcorn. pintobean May 2014 #11

One chart from an entire article is very misleading at best. sheshe2 May 2014 #8

Those don't invalidate these data. MannyGoldstein May 2014 #21

They don't even say that. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #86

There's no conclusive proof either way, there's basically 2 schools of thought... Hippo_Tron May 2014 #10

3) porn is like music: people pick the stuff that fits their bent yurbud May 2014 #16

That's basically #2 Hippo_Tron May 2014 #20

I was on the jury; here are the results: I hope whoever alerted will read these comments. CaliforniaPeggy May 2014 #14

Thanks for the info. MannyGoldstein May 2014 #19

Juror #5 needs to get the fuck over themselves... truebrit71 May 2014 #124

some of these comments are disgusting Skittles May 2014 #27

Commenting is their right. n/t CaliforniaPeggy May 2014 #29

WTF Skittles May 2014 #30

I thought the comments weren't hateful, but rather more full of empathy for the alerter. CaliforniaPeggy May 2014 #31

The first comment came across as pure vendetta. Nothing objective there. R B Garr May 2014 #32

THANK YOU Skittles May 2014 #34

It wasn't the first. It was the fifth... Violet_Crumble May 2014 #39

there was no empathy in the comments , it was condescending bs JI7 May 2014 #33

If the alert was a post, that post would have been hidden. Kurska May 2014 #51

I wouldn't vote to hide Juror #1's comment. pintobean May 2014 #59

The alerter seems to have read a different OP than the rest of us. Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #92

When people want an example of how the alert system is used to try to silence opposing viewpoints, hughee99 May 2014 #142

^^^THIS^^^ L0oniX Feb 2015 #182

However, the incidents of eye-strain and heavy breathing have gone up. Tierra_y_Libertad May 2014 #18

Obesity? Rape? MADem May 2014 #26

Correlation doesn't prove causation, as I acknowledged in my post MannyGoldstein May 2014 #44

So why throw gasoline on the fire, if correlation doesn't prove causation? MADem May 2014 #134

+1 sheshe2 May 2014 #151

You are entirely welcome. MADem May 2014 #171

There was a thread yesterday where porn was called out as a cause of sexual violence MannyGoldstein May 2014 #157

And, instead of contributing your deep research to THAT thread, you decided to make one of your own! MADem May 2014 #170

Your obsession with my betterment is flattering, MannyGoldstein May 2014 #172

I'm not interested in "bettering" you, Manny. MADem May 2014 #173

I wonder how many rapes are committed by pirates who watch porn... undeterred May 2014 #28

You are claiming correlation equals causation and TBH throwing out flame bait intaglio May 2014 #37

No. I specifically said I was NOT claiming that MannyGoldstein May 2014 #40

By now you should know, Manny. It doesn't make a bit of difference what ... 11 Bravo May 2014 #70

Have you actually looked at the OP? intaglio May 2014 #117

Post removed Post removed May 2014 #116

A jury disagreed with you, 6-1 MannyGoldstein May 2014 #123

That's their perception - not mine intaglio May 2014 #135

So you're wondering if I'm stating one thing but implying another? MannyGoldstein May 2014 #136

I know for a fact you were implying another intaglio May 2014 #137

We can agree on one thing: MannyGoldstein May 2014 #138

No he isn't Kurska May 2014 #49

Wrong, you have not read the OP intaglio May 2014 #118

Sorry, but you're dead wrong. Jim Lane May 2014 #141

wow, did you ever misread his post. Vattel May 2014 #169

Yes. bemildred May 2014 #42

lmao. Pokemon porn! Erich Bloodaxe BSN May 2014 #109

No expertise needed. Just simple common sense. Jamastiene May 2014 #43

Thank you for pointing out that a rapist justiceischeap May 2014 #45

I would never say the number of rapes has gone down. Jamastiene May 2014 #47

According to the chart, the incidence of REPORTED rapes is down. Jim Lane May 2014 #108

I suspect a high percentage. .. pipoman May 2014 #54

I believe the biggest single factor pipoman May 2014 #50

A post of yours I agree with! gollygee May 2014 #53

I agree that if there is a reluctance to pipoman May 2014 #57

I have no idea whether porn causes rape, but this doesn't prove or disprove anything. DanTex May 2014 #55

Kurska explained it better than I did MannyGoldstein May 2014 #61

Your explanation was even worse than Kurska's, I'll give you that... DanTex May 2014 #62

I'm agnostic as to this issue. dawg May 2014 #85

Not a valid conclusion until all factors are considered DrDan May 2014 #94

Is that from the Anthony D’Amato paper ? jakeXT May 2014 #103

Do you have anything that shows correlation? Pretty important. nt. NCTraveler May 2014 #105

Porn watching might -- MIGHT -- lower rape, but I don't consider porn watchers feminists. ancianita May 2014 #111

Well, female porn performers in porn make more than male porn performers. Orrex May 2014 #113

That's not saying much, in my view. ancianita May 2014 #159

What part of the male performer is worth 60% to 84% less than the female performer? Orrex May 2014 #162

the 60 to 84% less people that watch the movie to see the naked man maggiesfarmer May 2014 #164

Or... Orrex May 2014 #165

Overall the violent stats are down by a similar amount, my guess is there is something bigger at bettyellen May 2014 #129

You have not provided any proof to show it back a claim or counter claim. NCTraveler May 2014 #139

Nope. nt MannyGoldstein May 2014 #140

I get it. You are showing how politicians use statistics to back up their "personal" beliefs. nt. NCTraveler May 2014 #144

Nope. MannyGoldstein May 2014 #150

This message was self-deleted by its author MannyGoldstein May 2014 #146

The problem is that the OP's phrase "seem to counter" is annoyingly vague. Jim Lane May 2014 #143

Marking to read later. At work and don't want to skim it. Thanks. nt. NCTraveler May 2014 #145

Vague, but the best that can be said MannyGoldstein May 2014 #147

Statistical analysis is not law. [n/t] Maedhros May 2014 #152

Yes, I know. That wasn't my point. Jim Lane May 2014 #155

Agreed. Maedhros May 2014 #156

Imagine if prostitution was legalized. 951-Riverside May 2014 #174

"no rules" leaves it open to exploitation Prophet 451 May 2014 #176

People are already being exploited right now. 951-Riverside May 2014 #179

Dangerously libertarian Prophet 451 May 2014 #180

Prostitutes get raped gollygee May 2014 #177

Correlation is not causation Prophet 451 May 2014 #178