TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

An Infographic to convince people that gender inequality is a two way street. [Infographic]

KanyeWest_GayFish

April 22, 2015
707 upvotes
/r/MensRights
http://imgur.com/MfEXZnf
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title An Infographic to convince people that gender inequality is a two way street. [Infographic]
Author

KanyeWest_GayFish

Upvotes 707
Comments 124
Date April 22, 2015 4:26 AM UTC
(11 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/33fupb/an_infographic_to_convince_people_that_gender/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/an-infographic-to-convince-people-that-gender.982164
https://theredarchive.com/post/982164
Top posts by KanyeWest_GayFish

Wikipedia's page on the MRM is full of misinformation. Let's fix it.

94 upvotes
January 22, 2015
/r/MensRights

Hello /r/mensrights, I am writing a paper on sexism in News Media. Do you think you can help me out?

13 upvotes
February 10, 2015
/r/MensRights

I need help finding a post I saw on here a while back for use in my research paper.

4 upvotes
March 11, 2015
/r/MensRights

Comments

[–]chocoboat 140 points141 points142 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

This seems like a good idea. The graphics that only show where men are getting the short end of the stick... some people just dismiss it as anti-feminist lies or whatever.

Mix it with things that they know are true, and they might show more respect for men's issues.

Did you make the graphic? It's one of the better-designed ones I've seen around here.

[–]KanyeWest_GayFish[S] 71 points72 points73 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I did make it thank you! And the reason I added congress and sex trafficking was to make it more appealing to feminists. Do you have any other ideas with what I can add?

[–]ARedthorn 70 points71 points72 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Plenty of sources on domestic violence being 50/50.

Also, I might recommend renaming "rape" to "sexual assault"- given some legal definitions of rape exclude men, or exclude female attackers... you might be better off. (Also, counting the above... It's closer to 60/40. Add in prison rape, and it shifts even further... But admittedly, consensus on this is hard to find because no one bothered asking, much less researching and reporting until recently.)

[–]ckern92 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I agree with this - everywhere I see rape statistics broken-down by gender, the stats vary wildly. They can skew anywhere from 50W/50M to 90W/10M.

But, of course, I appreciate that the infographic is trying to appeal to feminists, as well, along with their widely-used statistics.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The 50/50 DV statistics are best presented alongside the funding and availability of services.

[–]Lucretius 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Could you post a PNG file of it instead of a jpg? PNG files, because they are not lossy compressed make line-art like this look nicer.

[–]chocoboat 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think it's good, you don't want to make it too crowded.

[–]Blutarg 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Including Congress is misleading, i'd say. A majority of voters are women, and studies have shown that women have as much chance of winning election as men. And does Congress fail to represent women? How many times has VAWA been renewed?

[–]Rex9 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You might also add to the conviction statistic with conviction rates. I've seen in many places that the rate of male conviction is about 80/20 convict/not vs women being 20/80.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Mix it with things that they know are true

Well, I'm not sure the bits about women are all necessarily true but if it gets people thinking then great.

[–]rocelot7 65 points66 points67 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

That rape statistic. Added with prison rape it should be majority male victims? Am I wrong?

[–][deleted] 48 points49 points50 points 11 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

Even without - if we count "forced to penetrate" as rape then it should be much closer to 50%

Also, sex trafficking is around 50% boys as well (at least for the US, I don't know about world-wide). Just some source examples:

http://www.courtinnovation.org/sites/default/files/CSEC_NYC_Executive_Summary.pdf

http://www.ecpatusa.org/statistics

Edit

Looked at the infographic source for the sex trafficking, two difference between that and my statistics:

  • it includes all ages, while I was only considering child sex trafficking. That's my bad.

  • it only looks at statistics gathered by doing statistics on the callers of helplines. So what it really means is that 85% of people who called and received help from a specific human-trafficking helpline were female.

That says more about who might feel like someone is there to help them / will believe them etc. than the actual demographics.

Edit 2

More statistics about sex trafficking: every source says "we actually don't really know", and it's estimated that just 0.4% of all sex trafficking is even identified. That would be enough to generate correct statistics if the identified cases were "random", but let's be honest - you identify much more when it's female victims (and let's be honest again - you care much more when it's female victims...)

However, any site with statistics I did find (that didn't just say "mostly women" or something like that) puts the % male victims at a minimum at 20%-25% and in minors at 36% minimum.

Unfortunately most of the resources I found were from some kind of "let's take care of women" website, and those just give the total number of victims and then say "see? It's horrible! We must help the girls!". I really hated that, but we're all used to it. I mean, even if it's just 25% boys, the fact that googling it gives you mostly organizations that care exclusively about girls is wrong.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you look at the crime statistics (in the rich countries at least), trafficking seems to be a very rare crime - probably because it's so bad a business idea that even stupid criminals wouldn't touch it with a long stick.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But it is an ongoing crime. By that I mean - if you get robbed, each instance counts one robbery that probably lasted less than a day. The victim goes on to live their lives.

If you get robbed every single day, that counts as 365 instances of crime a year.

Same with assault, and rape. But trafficking - one instance accounts for many many days of "crime". One trafficking instance can be compared to daily rape / assault for years. So the comparison really isn't that fair.

It should be compared maybe to murder, as both have such long lasting effect of the victim (admittedly, more long lasting for murder...)

[–]Ninebythreeinch 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

but... but... male privilege

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

also considering most guys don't report being raped, along with women false reporting. i don't know how much that changes things, but it's something.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 10 points11 points12 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

You're not wrong. I think this graphic is sort of throwing women a bone, though, by not accounting for that; because rape is literally the only issue they have. Every single other thing negatively affects men more than women.

As for members of congress? Women have more voting power in the US through sheer numbers, so women only have themselves to blame if they can't vote in a woman.

[–]EccentricWyvern 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Something something internalized misogyny.

[–]sharpiefairy666 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Women have more voting power in the US through sheer numbers

Sorry, I don't understand this point

[–]ThePedanticCynic 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Women control the vote, therefore you can't blame men for men holding more political positions.

[–]sharpiefairy666 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Are you saying that for this reason? "Since 1980, the proportion of women who vote has topped the proportion of men who do. And it was higher than ever in 2008, with 65.7 percent of eligible women voting, compared with 61.5 percent of men."

[–]ThePedanticCynic 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I was actually talking about there being more women than men alive in the US by a significant amount; nearly 2% more.

[–]Blutarg 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You aren't wrong. Counting only men in prison, more men are probably raped each year in America than women.

[–]tallwheel 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You're right. However, this infographic was made to convince people who normally don't think about these issues. If you put something that seems to go so against what they believe they'll be more likely to doubt all the other stats. Also, as sad as it is, the majority of people just don't want to put prison rape in the same category as rape that happens outside prison. For far too many people, prison rape is funny, and just 'doesn't count'.

I don't like it either, but we have to consider the intended audience.

[–]thrikreen80 22 points23 points24 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Very nice graph overall. The victims of rape is not accurate if you count prisoners as people, which you should. If you do, then more men are victims of rape than women.

http://www.amren.com/news/2013/10/more-men-are-raped-in-the-us-than-women-figures-on-prison-assaults-reveal/

Also, income inequality overall is still in favor for men, the closest statistic I have seen is 93%, though most state around 77 - 80% that women make to men. However, if you are a single, childless, under 30 woman living in metropolitan areas you are likely to be making the same or more than your male counterpart.

http://content.time.com/time/business/article/0,8599,2015274,00.html

[–]speedisavirus 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

However, if you are a single, childless, under 30 woman living in metropolitan areas you are likely to be making the same or more than your male counterpart

Because they are more likely to be working similar hours and haven't taken a year+ out of the workforce thus losing experience. There is no such thing as income inequality other than that women impose on themselves.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also because their male counterparts who outperformed them got married. The trouble with that data is it is automatically removing the top performing males.

[–]ThePedanticCynic 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is true, but if he did that there would be no portions of the graph in 'favor' of women getting the short end of the stick. Sex trafficking would still be there, but there's nothing to replace the rape stat with.

[–]dakru 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The victims of rape is not accurate if you count prisoners as people, which you should. If you do, then more men are victims of rape than women.

That link compares 216,000 estimated rapes of inmates with 90,479 rape cases outside of prison. If by "rape cases" they mean court cases or police cases then comparing that with an estimate for the population means comparing apples to oranges, don't you think?

[–]thrikreen80 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Great question. Though I agree that in most cases estimates and actual cases are comparing apples to oranges, in this case it is a bit different. Citizens that are not prisoners get the ability to report crimes and have a system set up to protect them and record any wrong doings. When crimes happen to prisoners it is often times overlooked and usually not recorded if at all, thus the estimation. So for this case, I would say it is the closest thing we can get to actually knowing. The data is being pulled from NIS most likely which is the National Inmate Survey. The studies have to come out each calendar year according to The Prison Rape Elimination Act of 2003. Again let me remind everyone that there was an Act created to stop rape from happening to prisoners. Now that number is misleading a bit as women are inmates as well, however, women only make up about roughly 9% of the inmate population. Therefore, it is safe to say you could probably drop about 20,000 from that number. However, from the 90 thousand cases outside of prison about 8 thousand of those were men, we have to remember that as well. Now the data here:

http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/pdca12.pdf

depicts the sampling size of 81,566 inmates. From a social research standpoint that is A LOT of people, and I would bet probably puts your confidence level over 90%, maybe closer to 95%. Which means that this "estimate" is pretty darn accurate. There may be error, however, probably not enough to even come close to the over 100,000 variance of victimization overall. According to the data I can't help but think more men are being raped in the U.S. a year than women. Additionally, we can talk about estimates outside of prisons/jails and we can think about unreported rapes of women and men (which men are a lot less likely to report rapes than women) and I would still argue that the data is in favor for men being raped more. Also, if you count for the fact that there are more women than men, population wise, we can look at per capita which would place men at even a higher risk in comparison to women.

However, there is a caveat that we need to take note, men are statistically way more likely to be committing the act of raping. In my opinion, this points to men being victims of culture. This culture largely targeting men in some way placing them at a severe disadvantage to feel the need to rape. Not saying women do not, because they do, however, the data does point to men predominantly. If we really want to combat rape, we need to get at the root of this cultural disposition towards men, institute meaningful social change and create a society which does not create rapists (men or women alike). Only then will we have the problem under control. Demonizing and imprisoning the rapists of today is not eliminating the rapists of tomorrow. And blaming a gender/sex biologically is not the answer either. Men or women are not born rapists they are made to be rapists through some sort of experiences or interactions with either their social or biophysical environments or both.

[–]cabinfervor 20 points21 points22 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Excellent-this is exactly what MRA and Feminists need to see more of in order for us to all realize we're fighting the same battle (or should be). Well done!

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I wish more here saw it that way. Because some feminists are vehemently anti-MRA, many/most MRAs are vehemently anti-feminist.

But the crux of most MRA issues are not things feminists have done. A few are, admittedly.

[–]jimmywiddle -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

many/most feminists are vehemently anti-male, many/most MRAs are vehemently ant-MRA. There ya go I fixed it for you.

[–]Mambo_5 11 points12 points13 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm impressed to see this in /r/mensrights. This graphic is wonderful and I hope it spreads like wildfire. Gender inequality hurts us all, thank you for posting this.

[–]jb_trp 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Gender inequality hurts us all

Let me ask you this question: If gender is more than a social construction (i.e. it has biological aspects to it) and we are a sexually dimorphic species, won't there always be these little "inequalities"?

I mean, I still think there are still prejudice people in society (obviously), people who are racist, sexist, etc. But overall I think we're a very meritocratic society. With that said... Equal opportunities/meritocracy doesn't mean there is going to be equal results. For example, more men enter STEM fields than women and consequently get those higher paying jobs... But I don't think this is due to inequality/sexism. People just make different decisions.

Or another example would be combat deaths. Yes, men are forced to register for the draft based on their gender, which is discriminatory and horrible, but there hasn't been a draft since the 1970. The men making up 97% of combat deaths may not be a result of "reverse sexism" as much as it's just the result of people making personal choices and being responsible for them. (However, while there are biological reasons for these choices, there is also a social aspect... The idea of "male disposability" which also affects suicide rates, prison sentences, etc.)

These are just thoughts and I'd be interested in what people think.

[–]Not_An_Ambulance 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I end up saying this about once a week on this forum... but, while there are biological aspects to gender, there are other aspects where people just have prejudices.

For instance, on a source I recently read a man made a comment about women having higher "emotional intelligence"... Please, no. I highly doubt any statistic that tries to show that is real, at most it's gender norms and people caring or not caring about what they're being tested on.

Of course, there are real aspects to this... Obviously women and men are set up for different reproductive strategies. I mean, the record for number of children for one woman is something like 68. For one man, it is somewhere north of 500.

[–]jb_trp 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. These issues are never that cut-and-dry and what actually is going on is a lot more nuanced. We ought not live within a echo chamber where we reinforce our own ideas.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So, I know that men get longer sentences for the same crime, and that's what you're trying to show with the "average prison sentence" statistic, but if that's what you're getting at, you should probably use a specific crime. Because if you just list "average prison sentence", you're going to get the argument that men commit more violent crimes and tend to be sentenced to longer sentences because they commit more heinous crimes.

It's the same issue as with the gender pay gap argument: people supporting the idea that wage inequality exists cite a number that doesn't control for type of job, hours worked, etc. What you're doing here is the same thing - not controlling for crime committed.

[–]ZombieAlpacaLips 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Might be good to have a whole infographic just for charts of sexual assault and rape from various sources using various definitions.

[–]Not_An_Ambulance 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I would really love to see that.

[–]Zezombye 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

How are the fact that members of congress are in majority men an inequality? Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there several studies that proved that the lack of women in politics, tech, etc was coming from their own will? If the only reason there's a lack of women in Congress is that they want not to be in Congress, then it's not inequality. Wouldn't inequality occur only if women wanted to be in Congress, but couldn't just because they are women?

[–]Michaelllllll 14 points15 points16 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there several studies that proved that the lack of women in politics, tech, etc was coming from their own will?

I don't know about that. I know a disgusting number of people that have told me they would never vote for a woman, because women aren't good leaders/can't be taken seriously/are weak. Granted most of these people were in rural, conservative areas, but it's still a prevailing opinion.

[–]pintocat 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

There are more women eligible voters than men. Women could vote every elected office women candidates if they wanted

[–]jb_trp 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly. When in the history of any democratic society has the "oppressed" class made up the majority of the voting population?

[–]Rex9 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And I've seen plenty of people who will vote for Hillary simply on the fact that she's a woman. I'll bet there are more of those than the "won'ts"

[–]Michaelllllll 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You may be right, I haven't seen data to support it either way. It could be a matter of location and demographics, but anecdotally I've found the opposite. I guess we will see in 2016.

[–]Blutarg 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You are correct.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&ei=Wwg4VbOCF4yZsAWU4YCYCQ&url=https://www.american.edu/spa/wpi/upload/Girls-Just-Wanna-Not-Run_Policy-Report.pdf&ved=0CB8QFjAA&usg=AFQjCNE_OIOn9NV2pMDgGOUjAk5dLhAwMQ&sig2=O788JTZikGCS7ccdyOoPqA

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

Correct me if I'm wrong, but weren't there several studies that proved that the lack of women in politics, tech, etc was coming from their own will?

You're right. No one believes it though.

[–]rafajafar 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Oh shit... no wonder feminist issues are being peddled so much lately....... they're warming us up for the idea of a woman president next election.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Are YOU ready for Hilary? blowsbrainsout

[–]rafajafar 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

The thing is, I don't give a fuck if she's a woman... I don't like her... but I HATE republican candidates WAY more. I wouldn't mind Elizabeth Warren though. She'd make a good president.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Think about this. If Hilary is president we will have had this Bush-Clinton-Bush-Obama-Clinton. Two families running the country for (you can do the real math) something like 22 of the last 30 years or something.

[–]rafajafar 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Yup. And if Jeb happens to win (fat chance) then we're still looking at the same thing.

I don't know what happened to democracy in this country, but I'm thinking of moving to Europe. Maybe Germany.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

I don't want Jeb either. I'll be voting, so far, for Rand. I don't vote based on social issues anymore like abortion or gay marriage. I could give a fuck about those with the state this country is in.

[–]rafajafar 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I don't vote for Rand because of his take on small government, his support of the Tea Party, the belief in failed Austrian Economics, the fact he's named after that nutcase Ayn Rand, and the fact he thinks this is a "Christian Nation"... I disagree with everything he is.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

His take on small government? Elaborate. Austrian Economics are not failed conceptually. Ayn Rand wasn't a nutcase. And this IS a Christian nation.

[–]Rex9 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

+agree on Warren.

Hillary's stance on men in general is disgusting.

[–]L0gic1o1 13 points14 points15 points 11 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

The male rape statistic is misleading; it requires penetration. A woman have sex without consent with a man- you know, rape, will be called 'Made to Penetrate'.

[–]KanyeWest_GayFish[S] 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Nope, I included the "made to penetrate" with male rape from the CDC survey.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yeah I'm not sure about this, the CDC numbers are basically bullshit.

I'm pretty sure when the numbers account for females forcing males to have sex with them the number is a lot higher.

http://www.apa.org/pubs/journals/releases/men-a0035915.pdf

Here's a paper.

[–]KanyeWest_GayFish[S] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

ount for fem

I read through the paper and while it does raise good points, the CDC survey is simply the only thing ever done to that scale, and I picked it because people will believe it.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Endless_Summer 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

In what way?

[–]jimmywiddle 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Their circumcision studies have proven time and time again to be flakey.

[–]Endless_Summer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, ok. That proof is what I was curious about.

Edit: you stated that as fact, can you please provide the source?

[–]SweetiePieJonas 5 points6 points7 points 11 years ago* (17 children) | Copy Link

You obviously didn't, because that would give you a nearly 50/50 result, not a 25/75 result. I also question your source on the sex trafficking numbers.

[–]KanyeWest_GayFish[S] 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

http://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/pdf/nisvs_report2010-a.pdf Here's the report. Do your own math if you think I am wrong then.

[–]SweetiePieJonas 16 points17 points18 points 11 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

I see now that you are using the "lifetime" numbers rather than the more relevant 12-month incidence numbers. I can get into why these "lifetime" numbers are misleading if you'd like.

Here are the 12-month numbers:

Estimated number of female victims of rape and attempted rape (Table 2.1): 1,270,000

Estimated number of male victims of rape, counting "forced to penetrate" as rape (Table 2.2): 1,276,000 (Note that this number is larger than the female number despite not including attempts)

[–]Zezombye 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

I can get into why these "lifetime" numbers are misleading if you'd like.

Get into it please, because I don't exactly see how and I'd like to know because I'll be using this statistic for my presentation :p Also, is the statistic that 1 in 5 women will be raped in their lifetime misleading or not?

[–]SweetiePieJonas 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

The "lifetime" statistic is misleading for several reasons.

  • It doesn't account for the fact that awareness of male rape victims and female rapists is a relatively recent phenomenon, so any lifetime statistics will necessarily include lots of older male victims who have long since rationalized away what happened to them. It also ignores the fact that law enforcement, government statistics bureaus, academics, etc. have only just begun to consider the possibility of there being male victims of rape, so older statistics will reflect this bias.

  • It doesn't account for the feminist victimhood narrative that has been drilled into women's heads for the past several decades, which will necessarily have led many women to retroactively reclassify a bad experience as "rape" when it really wasn't.

  • It doesn't account for the huge spike in all violent crime, including rape, that occurred in the mid-20th century across the Western world, which has since totally subsided (violent crime, including rape, is now at all-time lows). This allows those pushing the feminist victimhood narrative to cash in on fear that is 40 years out of date in order to prop up a false picture of what's going on in the present. The present picture is, of course, much better represented by the 12-month incidence numbers, which show that victims of rape are 50-50 male-female, while perpetrators are roughly 60-40 male-female.

As for the notoriously false "1 in 5" statistic:

  • The study that this statistic comes from is riddled with methodological problems, including a very small sample size, biased questions, and a comically broad definition of both rape and sexual assault.

  • The "1 in 5" statistic originally referred to both rape and sexual assault, although it is frequently cited to refer to only rape. Saying that "20% of women will be raped in their lifetime" is quite a bit different than saying "20% of women will have something happen to them that may have been rape, but also includes things like being groped in a bar, kissed without permission, having consensual sex with someone while drunk, being yelled at by your boyfriend, etc."

Both of these factoids, along with similar untruths like the wage gap, fall squarely into the third category of "lies, damned lies, and statistics."

[–]Zezombye 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks :D

[–]Endless_Summer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The one in five also applied to during college, not lifetime.

[–]SweetiePieJonas 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And that makes it an order of magnitude more ridiculous.

[–]Endless_Summer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yep. If you're going to make statistics up, at least make it believable. No rational person actually believes 20 percent of female college students are being raped at every University across the county. Feminism is a cult, you have to reject reality to subscribe to their beliefs.

[–]yoshi_win 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women remember emotional childhood events better than men.

Women are traditionally the only victims of rape. Lifetime numbers include older men who internalized this view, preventing them from recognizing their victimization for what it was.

Women live (~5 years) longer than men. Since rape incidence has decreased over time, then generally, male victims die (and fail to be counted) before female victims do. I'm curious now about the lifetime numbers stratified by age, will check later.

[–]Zezombye 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Isn't there also the fact that men were less likely to report rape, or that they weren't taken seriously, and so it wasn't counted as rape?

[–]Endless_Summer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I've never even seen a statistic that says one in five women will be raped in their lifetime. Got the source for that?

[–]User-31f64a4e 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The one in five thing is prevalent in feminist propoganda, but widely debunked.
http://www.washingtonexaminer.com/no-1-in-5-women-have-not-been-raped-on-college-campuses/article/2551980

https://www.aei.org/multimedia/sexual-assault-myths-part-2/

[–]Zezombye 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

In the paper, page 26, they say that.

[+][deleted] 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Zezombye 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

http://puu.sh/hn5mS.png

[–]EeeeeeevilMan 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I almost feel bad for offering this criticism, especially since it's based on being socially conditioned to see certain colors as masculine or feminine, but.....

I think it would help the readability if you changed the colors to something more feminine for the female portion. Red doesn't scream female to me and while reading the graph I kept sort of having to remind myself that the red was women.

I know that's stupid, but hey social conditioning is a thing.

Maybe light blue for the guys and pink for women? That's colors everyone associates with male and female without having to think about it.

Blue and red I automatically associate with politics, like Democrats and Republicans.

[–]KanyeWest_GayFish[S] 7 points8 points9 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Yeah I'll probably do that when I revise it. I turned this in for a school project in a gender class and didn't want to get criticized for playing into the "pink is for girls and blue is for boys" stereotype. But I will probably revert them back to light blue and pink when I revise it.

[–]BlacknOrangeZ 6 points7 points8 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Damned if you do, damned if you don't. At least if anyone criticises the final product for the colours you choose then you'll know to dismiss them because they are completely out of actual arguments against any of the data.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Could add kindergarten teacher and oilfield worker job compositions to that.

[–]keeead 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This suggests being a member of congress is a good thing!

[–]Blutarg 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Haha!

[–]Ricwulf 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love this infographic. More often than not, infographics tend to focus on one group. This one here removes that pissing contest that happens and shows that everyone has problems.

Thank You OP for making this.

[–]klowt 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

which link did you use for the average prison sentences?

[–]MrMeem 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks OP!

I hope you expand on this and add some of the clarifications / edits mentioned below. This is a great tool to promote conversation that doesn't originate from bias, and I'd personally love to share it with friends and family once it's at v2.

[–]Deansdale 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If you do not concentrate on sex trafficking but look at trafficking in general, the ratio of male victims is much higher.

[–]_____D34DP00L_____ 3 points4 points5 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think OP has omitted some statistics to make it more 'believable' to others.

[–]pupunoob 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol, they won't accept it and will just say the numbers are made up.

[–]thehumungus 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It would be really helpful if, rather than trying to argue that men have every little thing worse in every instance (or that women do) we just acknowledged the problems our genders faced and worked on fixing them. The winner of the victim olympics doesn't get anything.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The rape % is wrong however as many recent posts have started to explore.

[–]BlackMRA-edtastic 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The infographic underestimated male victimization in many areas. For example a John Jay study concluded juvenile males are half of the underage people sex trafficked in NYC. For rape victimization we see the usual disregard for forced to penetrtrate.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Spot on, but I think sex trafficking and human trafficking are two different things.

[–]Edghyatt 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Is anybody else okay with the High School graduates disparity? If that was the only inequality in the world, I wouldn't complain at all. 48/52 is not that disproportionate.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's pretty good, but radfems don't care about facts anyway.

[–]yummyluckycharms 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The problem with these sort of infographs is that while they are good for creating conversation amongst men, it offers little incentive for the matriarchy to care.....

People who benefit from the system have an amazing capacity to rationalize any sort of imbalance.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Great graphic, love the Egalitarianism.

[–][deleted] 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your comment was automatically removed because you linked to reddit without using the "no-participation" np. domain. Reddit links should be of the form "np.reddit.com" or "np.redd.it"

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]Not_An_Ambulance 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Can someone tell me which of the links is the one for custody?

I'm an Attorney and the title "winning of custody" feels a bit weird.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I used your image with credit in /r/Libertarian

Here is the link.

[–]iongantas 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, the rape victims bar is way off. I don't know what "sex trafficking" is supposed to mean, so I can't comment on that. The pink part for homeless also seems somewhat large.

[–]blamb211 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Is the high school graduation difference there because of gender politics, or is it just there because the female population is larger than the male population? That's just a very slight difference, I could very easily see it being there because the difference in gender numbers.

[–]galtthedestroyer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You forgot percent of people in prison, average life span, on the job deaths, and percent of people drafted into war.

[–]speedisavirus 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Except if you are going to apply the same criteria for "rape" to men as you do women then the men's rape rate is on par with the women's rape rate. At least.

[–]iamheathbar 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Rape victims"

[–]jtaylor73003 -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You should include congress compare to prison terms (I know you didn't mean for that to happen but if a person groups things then that is what you did) because can choose to be congressmen yet men can't choose what there sentence for a crime will be. I suggest comparing jobs like nurse to garbage collector.

[–]speedisavirus 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why you were downvoted I don't know. You are making a valid point that one is willful and the other is not.

[–][deleted] -1 points0 points1 point 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What this tells me is, a bunch of deadbeat congressmen who graduated from college are living on the street, and run around raping women and killing men until they finally commit suicide.

[+]masterrod -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

if men are more likely to die then women why would why should they get more custody rights?

I think custody portion doesn't help support the argument.

[–]L0gic1o1 4 points5 points6 points 11 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

If someone has cancer, we don't refuse to give them custody.

[+]masterrod -7 points-6 points-5 points 11 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

If men are likely to die, then women should get custody by statistics alone. According to this graph... It would appear society understands statistics better than patriarchy.

[–]L0gic1o1 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

We don't give custody based on life expectancy...

[–]masterrod -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What's it based on?

[–]L0gic1o1 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Who's a better parent?

[–]masterrod -3 points-2 points-1 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Clearly by the graphic another position could be who actually be who's going to be around during the child's life.

[–]L0gic1o1 1 point2 points3 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A neglectful mother who lives to 90 < A loving father who lives to 30

[–]Endless_Summer 2 points3 points4 points 11 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Dumb troll is dumb.

Women are far more likely to abuse children, better not give any of them custody.

[–]masterrod -2 points-1 points0 points 11 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

also more likely to be around.. What do you think is better for the kid? Being around or dying?

[–]Endless_Summer 0 points1 point2 points 11 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because the father would kill them? WTF are you talking about?

Way to top the stupidity of your original comment though.

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

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter