Crime

'Hidden Rise in Violent Crime' in U.K. Has More to Do With Data Manipulation Than 'Growth in Violence Against Women'

No, the data doesn't show some sort of secret sexual-violence crime wave nor a reversal of decades-long crime trends.

|

Pierre Mallien/Flickr

In both America and the U.K., violent crime has been declining for at least a decade. At least that's the conventional criminal-justice wisdom these days, driven by data from the countries' top law-enforcement agencies. But The Guardian now says that this picture is misleading, and there's actually a "hidden rise in violent crime" that's being "driven by growth in violence against women."

The assertion is based on work from researchers at the U.K.'s Lancaster University, led by sociology professor and gender-research chair Sylvia Walby. The team claims that, since late 2008-early 2009, violence against women in the U.K. has been rising, leading to a spike in the overall violent crime rate. For this analysis, they looked at data collected by the Crime Survey of England and Wales between 1994 and 2014.

"The turning point in the rate of these violent crimes is consistent with an explanation focused on the reduced economic independence of women and the impact of the cuts to services on which women disproportionately depend," notes their paper, published in the British Journal of Criminology. Vivienne Hayes, CEO of the Women's Resource Centre, also blames a resurgence of sexism, telling The Guardian that the ascendancy of "violent pornography, violent computer games, street harassment and everyday sexism" is "creating a view of women which nurtures and normalises our violation."

These twin narratives—rising sexism combined with government cuts to women's services—confirm the biases of enough individuals that the story of Britain's "invisible" crime wave has been exploding on social media and making its way to U.S. publications. "The true extent of violent crime against women is being masked," reported BuzzFeed Wednesday morning. But what's really being masked—or at least downplayed—is how researchers "discovered" this hidden crime wave: through data manipulation.

You see, the Crime Survey of England and Wales involves annual, face-to-face questioning of someone from 35,000 households about their experiences with crime. "It is regarded as the gold standard of crime statistics since it includes unreported crimes and is unaffected by changes in police recording practices," The Guardian notes. As part of the survey, respondents detail the most serious crime incidents that have befallen them or their household over the previous 12 months.

Incidents can be reported as a single occurrence or a "series" crime, defined as "the same thing, done under the same circumstances and probably by the same people." For series crimes, victims are asked to say how many times the incidents occurred, with options between 2 and 96 or "more than 96/too many to count." But to avoid outliers that might skew data, statisticians tallying results for official publication cap the number of "series crimes" one can be the victim of to five per year. This, officials say, helps avoid year-to-year fluctuations in violent-crime estimates that would provide inaccurate rates of crime over time and distortions of the distribution of risk the average person has of becoming a violent-crime victim.

Walby thinks this is methodologically inappropriate because it discounts the experience of "high frequency victims," which tend to include domestic-violence victims. According to her research, around 5 percent of Crime Survey Victim Forms fall prey to the series-crime cap each year. So she and her colleagues did a new analysis in which no series-crime caps were included. They also included sex crimes such as rape, attempted rape, and sexual assault—reported as their own category by the Crime Survey—in the overall violent-crime stats.

With these tweaks, Walby and colleagues produced a significant "rise" in all violent crime that "corresponds with the economic crisis in 2008/09." They conclude that their findings have "implications for the theoretical link between economic inequality and crime."

Victims' advocates and women's groups say Walby's statistics are more reflective of reality, as a) rape is a violent crime and should be included within that category, and b) the experiences of repeat domestic assault victims shouldn't be swept under the proverbial rug. I'm open to both arguments. But then let's be clear that much of what we're talking about here is changing the way we categorize crime, not actual shifts in violence levels.

To break it down: under the standard model, we had 1) no increase in "violent crime" between 1994 and 2014, 2) no increase in sexual assault between 1994 and late 2008, 3) an increase in non-stranger sexual assaults between late 2008 and 2014. Under Walby's model, we see 1) a decrease in violent crime (including rape) up until late 2008, 2) no separate sexual-assault category, and 3) a rise in both overall violent crime and violent crime against women between 2008-2014. In either rendering, the data does show some uptick in self-reported sexual assaults starting several years ago, but this is most accurately characterized as just that, not as a "hidden rise" in violent crime or violence against women overall.

As to the inclusion of series-crime incidents numbering more than five, doing so does yield a recent uptick in the number of repeat incidents reported by individual crime victims, particularly in situations where the victim was female and the perpetrator was a domestic partner. But what it does not reveal is an increase in violent-crime victims, violent-crime perpetrators, or female victims of violent crime overall. In fact, when Warby's team looked at crime victim numbers, not individual offense numbers, they found much the same pattern as for the capped analysis, with a continuing fall in the rate of violent crime and violent crime against women and a flat rate of domestic violent crime post-2008.

"Female victims of violent crime experiencing one or a small number of victimizations are continuing to fall," the study authors conclude, "while the number of female victims of violent crime experiencing high-frequency repeat victimizations has stopped falling [and] now appears to be increasing." Such an increase in violent activity from serial abusers—and its potential relationship to both the economy and cuts to victims' services—is certainly worthy of research and discussion. But it's a different thing entirely than there being some sort of secret sexual-violence crime wave or a reversal of decades-long declining crime trends.

NEXT: Bernie Sanders Said Something Sane About Campus Rape—Activists Are Attacking Him

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. It feels like there is more crime. Stupid facts can’t change that.

  2. “The turning point in the rate of these violent crimes is consistent with an explanation focused on the reduced economic independence of women and the impact of the cuts to services on which women disproportionately depend,”

    That is what the study is about. Fudged crime stats are simply a tool to get money.

    1. economic independence of women and the impact of the cuts to services on which women disproportionately depend

      That is a pretty impressive level of obliviousness. Few things say economic independence like depending on government services.

    1. [golf clap]

  3. “The turning point in the rate of these violent crimes is consistent with an explanation focused on the reduced economic independence of women and the impact of the cuts to services on which women disproportionately depend,”

    Let’s just get this all frontloaded now…

    1. I can see the headlines now:

      Violent Crime Rate Continues to Fall — Women and Minorities Hardest Hit

      1. “since late 2008-early 2009, violence against women in the U.K. has been rising.”

        Hmmm. I blame George Bush.

  4. “Such an increase in violent activity from serial abusers?and its potential relationship to both the economy and cuts to victims’ services?is certainly worthy of research and discussion.”

    OK, so there’s not more victims, but abusers are committing more abuse against the same victims.

    Maybe decreased welfare spending is to blame, since we know how peaceful those English welfare recipients are.

    Or maybe there’s been some other trend in the past decade which explains why men are being more violent to their “partners.”

    But I can’t think of anything.

      1. Rather what?

        I don’t know what you’re talking about since I’m not a RACIST.

        /sarc

      2. “Look over there! SQUIRREL!”

      3. No, Rotherham just reflects data manipulation. Before, police were pretending that crime didn’t happen, and now they sometimes investigate.

      4. Rotherham wasn’t even an isolated incident. There are 5 or 6 similar cases in England.

  5. “violent pornography, violent computer games, street harassment and everyday sexism” is “creating a view of women which nurtures and normalises our violation.”

    Is this a hat-tip to that video which accidentally showed that black men were the greatest threat to women on the streets of New York?

    1. I thought The Guardian was just hating on GTA V.

    2. But more on point, those black men were not acting in their capacity as black people, but in their capacity as males, and anyway they learned harassment techniques from white people.

      1. Ah, the complex calculus of intersectionality! Who said social science majors didn’t know any advanced math?

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mB97Qe2D4V0

    3. If you mean the greatest ‘threat’ to call out “Hey what up girl,” then it did appear so. But according to the makers of that video, white guys were ‘harassing’ this woman with the same frequency, but through some bizarre statistical anomaly, nearly all of the usable footage was captured when minorities were the offenders. Seriously.

      1. Ha! I bet some people actually believe that.

        wait………you aren’t one of them? Are you?

  6. Nice try, ENB, but the marauding rape gangs simply relocated to Germany. Why doesn’t Reason want to cover this?

    1. And Sweden, they have rapefugee gangs, too.

      1. You don’t have to rape like a refugee.

        /Tom Petty

    2. Look, Doyers, when it’s rape on campus, it’s merely a social panic and agenda-pushing. But when it’s in Europe/the UK, it’s all realer than real can be and there’s no agenda being pushed at all. Don’t you know how this works?

      1. I think we need to look at whether Rotherham and the New Years Rape Riots were rape-rape, or just post facto regret rape.

        1. Date-Gang-Rape? Or is it Gang-Date-Rape?

        2. Great question. After all:

          Several women in Cologne were raped and the justice minister said the definition of the offence in German law was too narrow. “There’s no clear answer in law to how much resistance a woman has to offer for an offence to constitute rape,” he said.

          1. We don’t have the details of each of the hundreds of reports of sexual assault, of course. We do have some reports of forcible vaginal and anal penetration (via fingers).

            Personally, I find the notion that its only a rape if the woman fights back hard enough to be outdated. A gun to the head? Knife to the throat? Holding someone else hostage? Being in a mob where physical resistance is impossible? Too many exceptions, IMO.

            1. Personally I think anyone who says “There’s no clear answer in law to how much resistance a woman has to offer for an offence to constitute rape” should hang on a lamppost for a little while and think about that.

              1. Agreed. The only resistance a woman should have to offer is verbal. Don’t fucking touch me or I don’t want to dance or whatever. Physical resistance shouldn’t be a factor.

            2. There does not have to be any resistance. As long as there is no consent, it is rape. This does not mean explicit consent is required. Implied consent is enough. I remember an episode of Lie To Me, where a sergeant would put a woman as lead convoy out of rotation if she didn’t sleep with him (thus increasing her exposure to roadside bombs). It was considered rape.

      2. The difference is that I can actually point to instances of massive abuse in European immigrant communities and no one can point to similar issues on college campuses.

        It’s ridiculous to try and compare people worried about things like Rotherham (which actually happened) to people worried about things like Jackie’s Glass Rape (which didn’t happen and never has happened).

        1. I’ll try to thread this needle.

          All college rape should be investigated and upon conviction the rapist imprisoned.

          All Muslim immigrant rape should be investigated and upon conviction the rapist imprisoned.

          How’d I do?

          1. Lemme shorten that up for you.

            All rape should be investigated and upon conviction the rapist imprisoned.

            1. That’s the Joke Dean-o!
              /sobs that this even needs to be said

            2. All rape should be investigated and upon conviction the rapist imprisoned.

              Unless it’s Billy Cosby. We should just skip past the investigation part as he’s already had his trial in the Supreme Court of Public Opinion.

              1. I should amend that. I don’t know him well enough to call him “Billy”.

              2. You are obsessed with the rapist Cosby, HM. Seriously, he should be tried if there is evidence of a crime.

                1. You misunderstand. I’m obsessed with Jello Pudding Pops; any reference to Cosby is due to that.

                2. Didn’t all this come up way outside the statute of limitations?

                  1. The criminal charge against him stems from an incident in 2004.

                    1. I clearly haven’t been paying attention. I thought the incidents were from a time when ‘ludes were still available.

                    2. Daaahhhh! Puddin’ pop! Daaahhhh!

                    3. You should’ve thrown up a trigger warning for the red-headed child actor in that.

                    4. That’s disgusting! Mixing of the colors!
                      *looks at HM’s handle*
                      Well this is awkward…

        2. Certain people want to appear PC no matter how many women have to get raped for it. It’s just the price we pay for not offending. Well, not we, but some random women who aren’t commenting here. Shows them.

      3. Does someone actually need to explain the difference between disturbed individuals making things up for sympathy, reclassifying unwanted handholding as rape, and gangs of men assaulting hundreds of women on the street, or were you just making a stupid analogy to remind your buddies that you’re a better person than the yokels?

      4. Glad you figured it out!

    3. I don’t think the Rotherham rapists and abusers were marauders; seems like they had bases of operation.

      I’ll state the obvious here: I suspect that Reason, and certainly the more mainstream media, don’t want to touch this because the first reaction will be accusations that whoever does cover this is anti-muslim, anti-immigrant etc. Because the story is going to have to be air tight, otherwise the usual apologists will nit-pick it to death. Hopefully somebody, or several somebodies, are working very hard to verify all the facts and waiting until that time to publish.

      1. Hopefully somebody, or several somebodies, are working very hard to verify all the facts and waiting until that time to publish.

        Since the somebodies in a position to do that seem to be mostly interested in making sure no immigrants are ever connected to rape gangs of any kind, I doubt this will happen. Let’s not forget that the New Years Rape Riots were covered up for several days by the police and the media, and that Rotherham was also covered up by the police.

        1. So is what you’re looking for a special tribunal maybe, that can get around these obfuscations of due process and the like that are letting these immigrant rapists walk?

          1. Exactly, Epi. What these activists want is kangaroo courts with no due process for men accused of rape, and the ability for any woman to get any man kicked out of the country, ruining his life. They’re not going to get that anytime soon through the normal criminal justice system, so that’s why they’re pushing so hard for these star chamber tribunals. It’s as simple as that.

            1. So… take all the muslims and enroll them at university, and then the problem is solved.

              Rape tribunals are already in place, and SSJWs might actually have a real rape crisis to complain about.

              Brilliant!

          2. Actually, Epi, what I’m looking for is a justice system and government that doesn’t allow pusillanimous proggy PC delusions to interfere with the administration of justice under good old fashioned due process, or the development of policy that implements the government’s duties to its citizens.

            Which is a much tougher lift than kangaroo courts driven by pusillanimous proggy PC delusions, but I’m demanding that way.

            1. That’s good to hear. What about kangaroo courts driven by pants-shitting xenophobic delusions? You ok with those?

              1. What’s with the straw men Epi?

              2. those sound smelly.

              3. What about kangaroo courts driven by pants-shitting xenophobic delusions?

                Nope, don’t like those either. Which is why I’ve never proposed any such thing, I guess.

                1. I am curious EPI:

                  Is Rotherham a delusion? Did it not happen at all, or is it actually the case that non-immigrants in England run similar organized rape gangs and just haven’t been caught?

                  Are the multiple New Years rape riots delusions? Did they not happen at all, or is it actually the case that non-immigrants in Europe run similar rape riots and just haven’t been caught?

                  1. Are you actively missing the point? Clearly, it seems.

                    Is the campus rape “epidemic” a delusion? Did it not happen at all, or is it actually the case that these male collegiate predators run similar organized rape gangs for people like Jackie and just haven’t been caught?

                    Are there multiple college rape delusions? Did they not happen at all, or is it actually the case that frat boys and tons of males on on campus run similar rape sprees and just haven’t been caught?

                    1. Is the campus rape “epidemic” a delusion?

                      Yes, it is.

                      Did it not happen at all,

                      No, it didn’t happen at all. There has been no significant increase in forcible rape of college women. The only way to get to an increase is by including things that are not rape by any sane definition.

                      That was easy.

                      I don’t think I’m the one missing the point, Epi. Your facile attempts to equate Rotherham and the rape riots to the campus rape moral panic founder on the rocks of reality, namely, Rotherham and the rape riots actually happened, and the campus rape epidemic didn’t.

                    2. Piss poor job of defending your straw man Epi.

                      Rotherham and the “campus rape moral panic” are not the same thing and RC never advocated for “kangaroo courts driven by pants-shitting xenophobic delusions”.

                      Weak sauce bro.

                    3. There, I’ve answered your questions. Are you going to answer mine?

                    4. So once again you have completely and utterly missed the point both Nicole and I were making. Well, I gave it one last try. I’m not surprised at all, but I had hoped maybe you’d get it.

                      Oh well. Have fun pants-shitting, it appears to be vastly more important to you than anything else.

                    5. Epi that was just embarrassing.

                      Are you ok?

                    6. The fact that you both thought those were actual questions is what’s embarrassing. Enjoy.

                    7. I think we both realized that they were strawmen questions, were you trying to be ironic or something?

                      If you have to explain the joke then it wasn’t that funny.

                    8. So once again you have completely and utterly missed the point both Nicole and I were making.

                      I thought your point was that there is no difference between concerns about campus rape epidemic and concerns about immigrant rape.

                      Was that not your point? Because you seemed to be working awfully hard to equate both of them as moral panic delusions.

        2. The somebodies I was thinking of were the non-european press, somebody like Reason who is willing to question the popular narrative. Of course, they’re going to have to get the cooperation of the german police. And that type of reporting isn’t cheap since some things you can’t do over the phone…

      2. Are you freaking blind, Tonio? Clearly the Muslim rape gangs have bases of operation AND packs of marauders prowling the streets at all hours looking for victims. New Year’s Eve was proved this. There is no doubt at all, none. Stop denying this because it doesn’t fit your narrative.

        /sarc
        and also the first post was /sarc 😉

        1. WHERE MUH EDIT BUTTON DAMMIT

        2. I know the post was meant sarcastically. But it did raise a valid point which I was trying to address in a less sarcastic fashion.

          1. Threading the needle of sarcasm and legit point. Well played.

          2. Damn your valid points! See what happens when you make valid points?

            *points to thread above*

      3. I suspect that Reason, and certainly the more mainstream media, don’t want to touch this because the first reaction will be accusations that whoever does cover this is anti-muslim, anti-immigrant etc.

        So is what you’re looking for a special tribunal maybe, that can get around these obfuscations of due process and the like that are letting these immigrant rapists walk?

        Well that didn’t take long.

        I think it’s a bit of a stretch to look at genuine, verified instances of sexual assaults by members of refugee or immigrant communities and compare them to made-up campus rapes, especially when you see them committed by people from societies not known for being especially keen on women’s rights or gender equality, if you know what I mean.

    4. They should just handle the refugees like they did the soccer hooligans.

  7. The other problem with things like this is that they always conclude that the reason for the alleged rise is whatever fits their biases.

    If a conservative group had determined this hidden rise existed, they would have blamed Muslim immigration, but since it was a leftist group they blamed cuts to women’s services. Even if the rise exists, they’d need to provide an explanation for why cuts to women’s services would magically make rape go up. Furthermore, why would these alleged cuts cause there to be more rapes against some women but not increase the number of overall rape victims?

    It’s obvious that even if the rise existed they were just shoehorning the problem into a pre-arranged agenda and have no actual evidence cuts to women’s services caused it.

    1. “Furthermore, why would these alleged cuts cause there to be more rapes against some women but not increase the number of overall rape victims?”

      OK, thinking like a feminist, I can come up with a feminist response: With fewer services, fewer abuse victims are leaving their partners, making them vulnerable to repeat attacks.

      Did I pass the political Turing test?

      1. That would likely be the explanation, but if people weren’t leaving abusive partners you’d expect the number of victims to be higher than before, you wouldn’t expect the number of victims to remain the same.

        1. Ah, but what if social service spending induces women who have been raped once to decide to leave promptly, so that the offender in any case will have at least one rape under his belt (so to speak), but the government is spending enough money to shelter the woman after the first attack so she won’t be attacked again.

          1. That would still cause a decline in the number of rape victims the next year because the woman wouldn’t be with her rapist anymore. Therefore, if the culprit was decreased spending on women’s services, you’d still expect to see an upward trajectory in number of victims because people wouldn’t leave their abusive mates between one year and the next.

            1. Look, I tried to “think” like a feminist, and I did the best I could.

              1. Your mistake was trying to tie things together in some sort of logical fashion.

                1. ^This. Remember, you’re dealing with Team Feelz, not Team Think.

              2. You did a very good job mirroring their arguments, it’s just their arguments are dumb.

                1. So, you think I can get a buzz-cut and infiltrate the Lilith Womyn’s Collective as a trans-lesbian, without being detected?

                  1. You’re probably not an ugly enough “womyn”.

    2. “The other problem with things like this is that they always conclude that the reason for the alleged rise is whatever fits their biases.'”

      “Problem?”

  8. Could we see a comparison of overall violent crime rates between the US and UK. Pretty sure that the UK’s is four times (or so) ours…

    1. No, you can’t.

      It is like evidence for climate change or attempting to vet syrian refugees. There is no trustworthy data out there. Anything you find is cooked up bullshit to prop up someone’s agenda or there is just no data at all. The crime stats coming out of the UK are absolute bullshit on par with climate change evidence.

  9. “The true extent of violent crime against women is being masked,” reported BuzzFeed

    I started with a skeptical eye, but now I’m convinced.

    “implications for the theoretical link between economic inequality and crime.”

    By the way, this is a bullshit phrase. There’s a very real link between poverty and crime, but I would bet there’s little to nothing linking income inequality to crime.

    1. Look, if the rich get richer, the middle class go on a rampage.

    2. And the link between poverty and crime is also very dubious. African Americans have a per capita GDP slightly higher than the country of Poland, yet Poland has a murder rate 1/20th that of African Americans. The part of the world with the least violent crime is East Asia, and this low crime rate includes the really poor countries out there. I think a poor person in a given culture is more likely to commit crime than a rich person in the same culture, but poverty itself does not cause crime.

      Income inequality is even less linked to crime. Every country has seen increased income inequality over the last 30 years, yet global crime rates have fallen substantially.

      1. I think crime might cause poverty.

      2. “African Americans have a per capita GDP slightly higher than the country of Poland, yet Poland has a murder rate 1/20th that of African Americans.”

        My only issue with this is that you are pooling the GDP of AAs that have ‘made it’ with those who are still stuck in the inner-city ghettos.

        1. And you’re also pooling rich parts of Poland like Warsaw with Polish people in the hinterlands who are incredibly poor. Russia’s homicide rate is also like 15 times what Poland’s is and Russia’s per capita GDP isn’t much lower than Poland.

          Indonesia’s another good example since their homicide rate is about the same as Poland’s and Indonesia’s per capita GDP is less than $5000, which means the average Indonesian is astonishingly poor even by comparison to African Americans.

          1. North Korea also doesn’t have any violent crime.

          2. Good points.

          3. “you’re also pooling”

            I assume you mean the ‘you’ in a very loose sense since I did no such thing.

            1. I know. I meant ‘you’ as in a theoretical ‘you’ looking at the statistics I posted.

          4. I don’t think cross-country comparisons are very valid, too many confounding factors. It’s also easy to cherrypick. Based off the data from Wikipedia, in East Asia you’ve got some countries (Japan, South Korea, Indonesia, China, Singapore, Hong Kong, etc.) with very low homicide rates, and others, such as Myanmar, Thailand, Cambodia, Laos, the Philippines, North Korea, and Mongolia, with significantly higher ones. While there are exceptions, I think there’s clearly a trend where the poorer the countries have higher homicide rates. The two Koreas are a pretty good test case given obvious cultural similarity, and NK has a rate more than 5x SK, and who knows how reliable the Nork numbers even are. And in Eastern Europe too, you do some some rates comparably low to Western Europe, but in general the rates are significantly higher.

            1. I don’t think cross-country comparisons are very valid, too many confounding factors.

              If you say “inequality causes high crime rates” or “low income causes high crime rates”, it’s sufficient to show that there are a few countries for which it isn’t true in order to disprove your statement. Implicit in your statement that “X causes Y” is already that there are no confounding variables.

              That is, the situation is not symmetric: you can disprove causality easily by citing statistics that include many confounding variables. Trying to prove causality by pointing at correlations, or just selected countries, on the other hand, doesn’t work.

      3. “The part of the world with the least violent crime is East Asia…”

        Well, Eastasians are too busy fighting a war with us to have time to commit crimes against each other. It has always been that way.

        1. Also, reading through this thread I am starting to suspect that perhaps culture has much more to do with crime rates than economic status or skin color.

          Hmmmmm. *strokes chin Thomas Friedman style*

          1. Well that, and the fact that there is no universal definition of what constitutes a crime and what type of crime it is. One country’s “terrorism” is another’s “workplace violence”.

    3. but I would bet there’s little to nothing linking income inequality to crime.

      I dunno, if only the upper middle class and better can afford private security and the government half-asses public security, then it seems like crime would promote income inequality. Think about all the places trapped in a cycle of poverty because they hit some critical mass of criminals such that business can’t stay open there so it becomes difficult for the non-criminals there to get jobs or accumulate capital.

      But, then, that’s not what you meant.

  10. The woman in the photo is just asking for it, am I right?

    *waits for high-five*

    1. One glance at your craggy face with its determined thrusting jawline and smoldering deep-set eyes, CJ, she’ll not only be fucking asking for it- she’ll be begging for it.

    2. Yeah she is…
      /high five
      “It” is a hat to match her jacket, right?

      1. “It” is my penis. Don’t make it weird, FM.

        1. Oh, sorry…want to hug it out?

          1. Do you like something pressing into your belly?

            1. I saw this yesterday and think it’s appropriate here, and hilarious.

              The look on the cops face is delightful.

    3. You mean the man with the yellow hat’s sister?

  11. My favorite thing on earth beside air is the human female. I desire that this ethereal Amaze be protected, cherished, and loved.

    That said, I have lost the ability to appreciate possessed motherfuckers who elevate Woman to such an extent that ethics and common sense are bludgeoned into a bloody gasping pulp in order to consistently present men to the world as a reprehensible collective of ravaging violators.

  12. You want to get these folks to backtrack on their data manipulation? Claim the increase coincides with an uptick of Muslim immigration to Britain.

  13. They should have thrown in some Muslim immigrants in there. Just a passing reference. Any and all Conservative skepticism would not only have evaporated by reversed.

    1. But if they had documented a link between Muslim immigrants and rape, any and all Proggy skepticism would be justified and celebrated.

      Its a dilemma.

      1. …what?

        1. BUT IF THEY HAD DOCUMENTED A LINK BETWEEN MUSLIM IMMIGRANTS AND RAPE, ANY AND ALL PROGGY SKEPTICISM WOULD BE JUSTIFIED AND CELEBRATED.

          ITS A DILEMMA.

          Can you hear me now?

          1. Can you hear me now?

            Now I’m going to imagine you as this guy forever.

            1. that guy gained weight.

    2. Some more correlations you may find interesting in order to support your various political agendas:

      http://www.tylervigen.com/spurious-correlations

      For starters, notice the 99.79% correlation between “US spending on science” and “suicides by hanging, strangulation and suffocation”.

  14. We obviously need scientists who are better trained at identifying “Victims”

  15. Sure – the Rotherham sex abuse circle operated 1997 to 2013, so UK crime hasn’t gone up over the past decade due to immigration or whatever.

    And the 160 British police officers being investigated for systematically ignoring abuse complaints – isolated cases. I bet we can trust the statistics.

    1. Those are different issues:

      The survey asks a sample of people whether they have been the victim of crime. They therefore avoid the very serious problem of the British cops underreporting crimes in their jurisdictions. The survey should be unaffected by the police deciding to turn a blind eye or to prosecute crimes vigorously except as a second order effect (criminals in jail mean fewer victims answering survey questions affirmatively).

      Whenever a survey that is regularly repeated changes its methodology, it’s very tricky to compare the before and after change trends because the trend can be the product of the methodology change.

    2. Drake, the problem is that Rotherham didn’t impact the stats at all because nobody was convicted over those years.

      Now, would one rape gang racking up, say, 3 – 400 rapes per year move the national statistics? I have no idea.

      1. Retract that. I was thinking the survey was of convictions, not of victims. Carry on.

      2. The other issue is that even if Muslim immigrants have higher assault rates than other groups, rates could still decline if there was a big enough decline among those other groups.

        Europe is a rapidly aging population, so it stands to reason assault rates by ethnic Europeans are going to be dropping. You could have high assault rates related to things like Rotherham and New Year’s Eve while having the national rate remain static or even drop because every other group in society saw a large enough decline.

        I don’t think there’s going to be a massive rape epidemic related to large scale immigration, I just think the immigrant groups are going to be higher risk than the people currently living in Europe. That’s not a particularly unreasonable assumption.

        1. We need an age-defined comparison ex “rapist rate under 35”.

            1. Don’t take his straws away from him Dean. Don’t be mean.

        2. The other issue is that even if Muslim immigrants have higher assault rates than other groups, rates could still decline if there was a big enough decline among those other groups.

          That’s why it’s important we bring in more Muslims from ME nations. There’s a rape gap!

    3. Rotherham rape gangs? You mean that weird sex thing that happened one time?

      1. Only like 1400 victims.

      2. No, there were several more Rotherhams.

  16. All these rapes are making me thirsty.

    1. We call those pretzels down here.

      1. Don’t let him get away with that, FM!

        Calling sliced ham ‘canadian bacon’ is already rapey enough.

      2. Florida man pretzels his first cousin while smoking meth.

        1. You can prove that! Can, um…can you?

          1. Can’t. Sumbitchin’ phone.

          2. Shall I fetch you your Freudian slippers, Mr. Florida Man?

            1. That would be lovely.
              /reclines in bean bag

  17. Anyone else notice Warty’s curious absence in this thread?

    1. He’s probably on a flight to Cologne right now, and just doesn’t have wifi.

    2. He isn’t a Muslim, therefore whatever he does can be ignored.

      1. Exactly. We pants-shitting xenophobes have a long history of ignoring organized rape gangs that operate for years, and rape riots, as long as they are done by white people.

        1. have a long history of ignoring organized rape gangs that operate for years

          Like the Catholic Church?

            1. Other acceptable answers were:

              1. Spring Break at Lake Havasu
              2. The Congressional Internship program
              3. 20th Century Fox

              1. What the hell?

                /Jerry Sandusky

              2. 2. The Congressional Internship program

                Closeted Republican Congressmen Gone Wild

                1. Original or sequel?

            2. Point to Suge on the Catholic Church thing. Well played.

            1. [rips up picture of Episiarch]

            2. Everyone remember when all the Village Voice wrote that article saying, “its not actually Catholicism to blame, but the violence inherent in “maleness”, and the American pop-culture’s sexualization of children?

              they had a lot of good points there.

              1. “Now you see the violence inherent in the system my penis.”

              2. American pop-culture’s sexualization of children?

                Weren’t they raping kids all over the world? I thought America was the first to bitch about it.

                1. In a stage whisper: “I think he was being sarcastic”

                  A younger Irish friend of mine and I were talking about how quickly Ireland had gone from being a very conservative Catholic country to what it is today and he got super-cereal for a minute and said “well systematically raping children and actively covering it up for decades tends to put people off your religion.”

                  And then we moved on to talking about recipes for pickled pigs heads.

                  1. “well systematically raping children and actively covering it up for decades tends to put people off your religion.”

                    That doesn’t effectively answer how the Catholic Church hadn’t effectively put people off their religion over the previous thousand years.

                    1. Before that they were more murdery when challenged. This is what they get for retiring the auto-da-f

                2. “”Weren’t they raping kids all over the world? “”

                  who? catholic priests? i don’t know, i only ever got raped at mass in NY. I went to pope John Paul II’s home-town church in Krakow and didn’t even cop a feel.

                  1. *confession = i was 18 at the time and clearly past my prime.

                    1. Damn, 18, what were you expecting ya’ old crone.

                  2. Serves you right, Gilmore. Mincing around in a slinky surplice like you were.

              3. Uh….I didn’t read the piece but even as a kid (catholic) I thought it was weird as hell and creepy that priests and nuns had to be celibate. They are right about the catholicism but not about the maleness. When even a ten year old figures out that a profession demanding celibacy is going to be a pervert magnet…you have problems.

          1. Yes, and Penn State. And teacher’s unions. And arch-white-guy Bill Clinton. Lord knows, we all love to make excuses for all of those and don’t call it reprehensible and want them to be punished because no one should be above the law. Otherwise, we might be consistently anti-rape and you wouldn’t be able to feel superior to us.

            Hey, where do you get the cosmo talking points? I mean, it’s got to be a fairly ramshackle operation compared to Journolist. Does Nikki just email them to you and Warty and Epi?

  18. Also, people really under-appreciate the role Techno music plays in encouraging sexual assault.

    1. I was confused by the shift from sexual “assault” to sexual “harassment” in the article. Or does Sweden count sexual harassment as sexual assault?

      1. “does Sweden count sexual harassment as sexual assault?”

        Yes. Which is partly how i think they get to those astronomically-high sexual-violence stats.

        I think the real ‘story of the story’ going on w/ the Euro ‘moozie rape-gangs’ is basically the same as the media-story in the handling of the San Berdoo shootings vs Oregon ‘militia’ stories.

        Its not so much about the facts on the ground, but the way the media is variously trying to amplify/or downplay the facts for political narrative-convenience.

      2. I was actually wondering that too. Wasn’t that a big issue with the WikiLeaks guy? Sweden said he’d raped someone and everyone was confused by it not just being sexual assault, but their definitions were vastly different from the US’s.

      3. Where’s TechnoVikiing when you need him?

    2. At least Vice has taken a brief hiatus from their Global Warming reporting.

      1. Just you wait until they connect the dots between climate change and rape.

    3. In an attempt to approach the matter objectively, we reached out to a panel that includes a feminist, a representative of the far-right Swedish Democrats as well as the police.

      That is one of the strangest sentences I’ve read all week.

      1. “Objectivity” is apparently a matter of getting the perspective of the batshit-crazy left-wing, batshit-crazy right-wing, the (never self-interested) State, and blending them together into a narrative-smoothie.

      2. Look, you just talk to three people who are completely full of shit in different ways, and it averages out to the truth.

  19. Hmmm, the number of self reported sexual assaults rises right at the time that large media campaigns claiming a rise in sexual assaults and defining down the what behavior counts as a sexual assault begin….

    Oh wait I know, more women are reporting sexual assaults because their facebook friends are telling them that every single thing that happened to them that was remotely sexual counts as a sexual assault

  20. You are never going to get funding to solve a problem that is going away without your help.

  21. This is an awesome new way to conduct research. I wish I’d known about it when I was working ony degree.

    1. Establish a conclusion.
    2. Find data sets.
    3. Manipulate data to support the conclusion.
    4. If it still doesn’t work, fuck it make shit up.
    5. Find a peer who’ll sign off without reading.

    Easy peasy. Done.

  22. $85 an hour! Seriously I don’t know why more people haven’t tried this, I work two shifts, 2 hours in the day and 2 in the evening?And whats awesome is Im working from home so I get more time with my kids. Heres where I went,

    ———— http://www.nettrader2.com

  23. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.WorkPost30.com

  24. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My sisters friend has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out. This is what I do..

    Clik This Link inYour Browser…….

    ? ? ? ? http://www.WorkPost30.com

  25. my neighbor’s half-sister makes $83 every hour on the computer . She has been without a job for 9 months but last month her payment was $17900 just working on the computer for a few hours. why not try this out

    +++++++++++++++++ http://www.Wage90.Com

  26. Start working at home with Google! It’s by-far the best job I’ve had. Last Wednesday I got a brand new BMW since getting a check for $6474 this – 4 weeks past. I began this 8-months ago and immediately was bringing home at least $77 per hour. I work through this link, go to tech tab for work detail.
    +_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+_+ http://www.buzznews99.com

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.