699,150 posts

What kind of bullshit is this?

Reddit View
January 5, 2020
33 upvotes
post image

Post Information
Title What kind of bullshit is this?
Author DontTreadOnMe96
Upvotes 33
Comments 14
Date 05 January 2020 02:46 AM UTC (8 months ago)
Subreddit antifeminists
Link https://theredarchive.com/post/707333
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/antifeminists/comments/ek6uqa/what_kind_of_bullshit_is_this/
Similar Posts

Red Pill terms found in post:
MGTOW
Comments

[–]VestigialHead13 points14 points  (0 children) | Copy

Maybe if we also include full female genital mutilation for any false reports or fake rape accusations then this could be workable?

[–]Egalitarianwhistle9 points10 points  (9 children) | Copy

There are so many examples of rape convictions being overturned years later.

Combine this with #believewomen and women can castrate you on a whim.

[–]hollyscrew2 points3 points  (8 children) | Copy

What the conviction rate for rapes in your country. In mine it's nowhere near 100%. It's actually much closer to zero.

[–]istira_balegina2 points3 points  (7 children) | Copy

And yet a substantial percentage of them still turn out to be fake.

[–]hollyscrew1 point2 points  (6 children) | Copy

Again, not over here mate. With conviction rate less than 10% there's no way someone could count on an allegation even being taken to court, let alone result in a conviction. Sorry but I had to do Criminology last semester so found the stats just don't stack up.

[–]istira_balegina1 point2 points  (5 children) | Copy

In the USA, RAINN claims less than three percent of rape allegations result in convictions with jail time. Yet there are tons of false rape convictions in the US because they convict on the word of the accuser alone. So unless your court system somehow uniquely exists in the perfected asshole of Jesus Christ I'm not sure how you're getting your numbers. Please cite what you learned in your criminology class.

[–]hollyscrew0 points1 point  (4 children) | Copy

Thankfully it's still holidays for us but here's an easy entry, https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-50812810

[–]istira_balegina0 points1 point  (3 children) | Copy

So let me get this straight. You're saying that the same country in which "All current rape and serious sexual assault cases in England and Wales are to be reviewed "as a matter of urgency" to ensure evidence has been disclosed" (2017) because "the police were systematically withholding evidence from the defense" in multiple districts, doesnt have a false conviction problem?

You sir/madam, have swallowed the feminist coolade hook line and sinker.

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/amp/uk-42841346

[–]hollyscrew0 points1 point  (2 children) | Copy

To confirm the above statistics youd need to combine the number of rapes reported to the console police (https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/crimeinenglandandwales/yearendingjune2019#no-change-in-the-most-common-types-of-violent-crime-but-a-fall-in-homicides) with the number of convictions for rape for the same period (https://www.cps.gov.uk/cps/news/annual-violence-against-women-and-girls-report-published-0).

Ive just found the high level data pages tp roughly confirm the less than 10% conviction rate (it's actually less than 5%). Either way it clearly shows the assertion that all a women would need to do is make an allegation for a man to be convicted its false.

[–]istira_balegina0 points1 point  (1 child) | Copy

No one is saying all a woman needs to do is make an allegation for a man to be convicted. The question is whether a substantial amount of convictions are false. Yes, obviously many allegations dont result in convictions. I already cited the RAINN statistic. You're arguing a strawman fallacy by using an irrelevant conclusion.

You're also conflating sufficieny with possibility. Noone is saying an allegation alone is sufficient for conviction. The question is whether it can possibly lead to conviction.

You're also assuming that because something has few results it must be rigorous. That is simply a false equivalence.

You're also assuming that because something is rigorous it must lead to true results. That is also a false equivalence.

You also entirely ignored all data to the contrary, which I provided in the BBC report on evidence withholding by police throughout England. Which is some sort of deliberate confirmation bias.

So I'm counting five or possibly six logical fallacies you made in one argument.

[–]hollyscrew0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

There are so many examples of rape convictions being overturned years later.

Combine this with #believewomen and women can castrate you on a whim.

This was the first post I replied to. Someone did say that all a women needs to do is make an allegation. Then you decided to insert yourself as their defender. I'm not sure why.

My argument was a simple one. An allegation does not lead to conviction/castration. I provided evidence to support that.

Your issue appears to be with false allegations which at no point I mentioned, not with my argument.

[–]XxfagxX1 point2 points  (0 children) | Copy

I'm not defending pedos or rapist but everything isn't true mutilation should be illegal for everyone and everything

[–]Leudbur0 points1 point  (0 children) | Copy

I'm either really bad at looking for the original post, or it was deleted from /askreedit. I wanted to see what people were saying

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points  (0 children) | Copy

Korea already does this I don't see a problem with it. I mean it has to be proven proven.



You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2020. All rights reserved.

created by /u/dream-hunter