ADAM'S RIB

You mentioned sexual assault as diminishing factor with the word "except".
Sexual assault is a terrible crime , yet you pointed out that women are less likely be murdered, beaten etc. except for sexual assault.

You don't get the misogynistic implication you made here. Of course, how could you with your frame of mind.

Look at the full quote, Jane.

My point is that according to the data, men are more likely than women to be the victim of a violent crime (when all violent crimes are considered together) and that men are more likely to be the victim of any type of violent crime except for sexual assault.

This is simply a statement of the facts according to the BJS. I made no value judgement on whether murder or sexual assault is worse. In fact, I am stating that women are more likely to be the victim of sexual assault than men. I am surprised that you picked out this statement as "misogynistic".

You are the one making the making the misogynistic implication. I am simply stating a fact as reported by the BJS.

Facts are just facts.

The idea of a "misogynistic fact" strikes me as strange. A fact is just a fact... the ideology that it favors doesn't make it any more or less true or relevant.

In my opinion, a just, progressive society would be primarily fact-based. The less prejudice and political emotion play in public policy, they more fair society is to everyone.

It is not a good thing when specific facts that question a certain ideology are drowned out and anyone who states them is attacked. This makes social discourse a matter of falling in line with political pressure rather than asking questions and honestly looking for truth.

That is what is happening on these threads.

No, that's not.

Your wicked views of women are the problem and your rhetoric will not the change that.

Specific facts that men are beaten more than women and that women rank the scale out of the two where rape is concerned, has nothing to do with the original post.

Again with the baseless personal attacks.

If your accusations are correct, all you have to do is post a single example to prove that they are correct.

But you can't... it is just a baseless personal attack.

There is something more Found Soul.

Irrelevant facts in a thread don't warrant obscenity laden tirades and biting personal attacks. I have not attacked anyone on these threads. All I have done is stated a fact (backed by BJS data). I haven't attacked anyone personally, and I haven't said anything that should offend anyone (other than an ideology).

Obviously there is something to the fact I posted... it is dangerous enough to inspire a vicious reaction to shut it down so that it can't even be discussed. Irrelevant facts don't do that.

This wrath is from me daring to question an ideology. I am obviously onto something.

That could be one way of thinking about it.

Though, strangely enough every time "someone" tries to discuss the actual original post, you decide to shove your opinion down ones throat over and over and over.

Now that is a fact

No, you jackass. The "something" is that this is not the first time you have willfully trashed a thread of mine. I truly despise, because you're clueless, because you brag about your science background but can't take on-board truly basic things such as that you "facts" (that has not been established, and as i pointed out, only refers to the U.S.) are not relevant . . . but mostly because you stomp around like a whiny child ranting about irrelevancies while trashing a thread, and a thread the existence of which does you no harm.

You're "on to" nothing, there is no desperate attempt here, other than your attempt to rant bout ideology when you are the only ideologue present. I suspect, though, that you may be on drugs, and suggest that you get something a good deal less toxic.

Is there anyone here who is willing to have an intelligent, fact-based, respectful discussion on this topic?

I believe that everyone except for EhBeth and I has jumped into this discussion with a personal attack... and EhBeth jumped out again pretty quickly. An intelligent discussion isn't based on personal attacks.

Anyone?

There's nothing to discuss, pea wit. I expressed an opinion, and there are no "facts" which you have come up with that contradict that opinion. You are obsessed, and i strongly suspect that you fear and hate women.

Four words.

Start your own thread.

The original post in both of these case is based on a gender-based stereotype. I don't see any other way to look at it.

Maybe you could explain to me how you interpret the original post in either of these threads?

He doesn't want to do that, no one will show up.

No, there is no gender stereotype. If you can't see any other way to "look" at it, that's a failing on your part. The OP simply expressed my admiration for women. Your problem, apparently, is that you don't think women deserve admiration, on the hilarious basis of a claim that men get beaten more often than women.

Mr. Science in action . . .

By the way, you've willfully misquoted me, but then, distortion seems to be your stock in trade.

This is a public forum. You post things in public and you get responses.

Setanta posted a thread that, in my opinion, expressed gender stereotypes based on a false premise. I have every right to express my opinion and Setanta (or anyone else) has every right to ignore me. But he and his group didn't ignore me. They started right in with personal attacks and escalated to obscenity-laden tirades. I didn't attack them, nor did say anything particularly offensive toward women or any other group.

All I did is question a narrative.

If they had just let it go, rather than keep out a stream of personal attacks and name calling over two threads, then it would have ended rather quickly. I would have expressed my opinion. They would have expressed theirs. And, that would be it.

I don't think I am different than most human beings, I respond when I am attacked. In this case I think I have responded admirably.

It would be interesting if anyone would be open-minded enough to actually discuss the issues rather than just defending the politically correct line and attacking anyone who dares to question.

And everyone here has every right to point out your idiocy. There was no stereotype, there was no "narrative." I just expressed an opinion about women, to the effect that i admired them. That got you peein' in your pants right away.

Oh, and it wouldn't have been over two threads if you hadn't decide to trash the second thread, too. (It's still hilarious that it took Mr. Science three days to even notice that there was another thread.)

And everyone has the right to go on obscenity laden tirades....