Why are so many Feminist statistics accepted without scrutiny?

Punder_man · 2024-05-25T23:37:43+00:00

Feminists are very good at either cherry picking or twisting statistics to fit their narrative..
Any scrutiny of the statistics or their methodology is treated as a personal attack on them.

Its one of the main issues I have with their claims of "The Pay Gap"
They quote statistics which they claim "Prove" their claim.. but when I ask for a copy of the raw data and a copy of their methodology used to arrive at their conclusions.. I get radio silence..

When I ask them how their methodology specifically accounts for factors which could contribute to the difference between men and women (Time spent working, Overtime, Working in more dangerous professions etc) I get told "All relevant factors have been controlled for..
But they can never explain exactly HOW they have been controlled for and instead seem insistent on taking the stance of "Trust me bro, I know what i'm talking about"

Or, you have the way they use Sexual Assault / Rape and Domestic Violence statistics..
They will use the overall statistics of rape, see that women are the majority victims and use it as evidence for them to claim "Not all men, but we don't know which man will rape us so we have to treat all men as potential rapists"

But, if you look into the statistics they are using, it becomes apparently that women are more likely to be raped by a man they KNOW vs a complete and random stranger..
But, they don't like that fact so they obfuscate it and instead push the narrative of ALL men being "Potential Predators"

It also doesn't help that the statistics they use are fundamentally flawed..
The definitions on both Rape and Domestic Violence are heavily biased in favor of painting women as victims.. so of course the statistics will reflect this..

Remember people, there are Three types of lies in this world:
Lies, Damned Lies and Statistics.

sorebum405 · 2024-05-26T06:33:06+00:00

There are multiple cognitive biases at play that makes people more inclined to accept feminist claims.A major one is that people have a biased perception of men and women. Men are viewed as having more agency so it is easier to typecast them as perpetrators, and women are viewed as having more patiency so it is easier to typecast them as victims. This is why feminist ideology was able to gain traction in the first place, and was able to eventually become massively influential.

It already aligns with what we as a society believe about men and women.So as a result we now have major international organizations like the UN and WHO supporting Feminism. We have the media and politicians supporting feminism and repeating feminist claims like the wage gap, and the 1 in 4/5 campus sexual assault myth. We have gender studies courses that teach feminist ideology, and feminist professors who are openly misandrist. Then we also have tons of biased studies done by feminists that have been widely cited.

So feminists also have the advantage of having their ideology supported by "authoritative sources",and their claims get repeated over and over again. This means they can take advantage of the authority bias and repetition bias. This then leads to the bandwagon effect. Which can then also cause groupthink, because people want to conform to what is socially acceptable.

Then on top of all that, because the ideology has become so influential feminists also have the power to effectively shame people who speak out against it. This leads to a society where people are discentivized from speaking against feminism, and are incentivized to support feminism. Which of course reinforces feminism even more. This makes it far easier psychologically to just go along with what feminist say, because the information is easily accessible and even spoon-fed to you, and it is socially acceptable to believe it.

Being critical of feminist claims is much more difficult, because it is generally much harder to find sources refuting them, or to use your own critical thinking skills to analyze the claims yourself. It is also uncomfortable because you are going against the grain, and will face some degree of social disapproval, and sometimes even violence if you are too vocal about your views.

To use an analogy you could say opposing feminism is like trying to swim against a river current, while supporting it is like swimming with it. I hope my comment helps.

sskkkswwee · 2024-05-26T03:33:13+00:00

I'm surprised that so many here are missing the obvious.

It's simple. To humans, the importance of an issue is not merely based on its actual prevalence; it is also based on the perceived gravity of the threat, which is related to the value we assign to those affected. We simply value the livelihoods of women much more than we do men, so naturally, we are much more attentive and vigilant about their issues, to the point of delusion.

The more you care about someone, the more willing you are to see them as a victim of any number of ills. We believe feminist statistics because we simply want to, not merely because they are clever propaganda.

Take the late phenomenon in Australia, where the murders of a handful of women were able to incite widespread concern over "locker room talk", "social condoning of femicide", etc. This is in spite of the fact that men are murdered at many times the rate of women, such that it could not possibly be the effect of societal discrimination against women (indeed, it implies benevolent sexism!); and in spite of the fact that, if 'locker room talk' and 'condoning of femicide' were so prevalent, then the hysterics themselves should have witnessed female disposability at some point in their lives (which is ridiculous). They readily deny the reality before their eyes, which is that men are murdered at many times the rate of women (to such an extent that many have probably known victims), because the true reason the murders of a few women are able to incite their opprobrium and enflame their sense of justice is not because women are actually targeted, but because women are more important to them. Any feminist argumentation is post hoc justification for their concern.

Current_Finding_4066 · 2024-05-26T09:58:59+00:00

Feminists have usurped most of the mainstream media. Because of this such misinformation comes from a "reliable" source that people are more prone to trust. Most people do not care to fact check and sometimes it is hard to fact check things. This is also why feminist are very aggressive at attacking and discrediting anyone who counters their claims. Because it is important who controls mainstream media, government information sources,... Like the UN Women, and a host of government agencies, panels, government funded NGOs,....

I have been hearing about need to educate more women, more opportunities for women,..., all my life. It took me to see that their messages did not really represent reality in the Western world to start rejecting their claims. I saw that majority of students were women. I was hearing all sort of bullshit about how men need to do better at sex, then I have experienced how selfish women are at sex.

Many men around here stated they realized after they got fucked over themselves. Unfortunately, too often men do not care until it hits them personally.

Superteerev · 2024-05-25T23:40:31+00:00

I personally find that Feminism is rarely willing to be introspective of its own ideas and historically presented concepts, and like all advocacy groups (including this sub) need to win debates by being the more worse off, more victimized group etc.

And that means they swiftly denounce any opposing research studies/statistics as having faulty methodology but never critique ones that support their framework.

Maxcorricealt2 · 2024-05-26T02:50:30+00:00

The “women are wonderful” effect, i don’t want to give misinfo when trying to give an overview so i recommend looking into it yourself

LucastheMystic · 2024-05-26T00:45:37+00:00

The simple answer is bigotry. They cling to crime stats harder than Conservatives do in regards to Black People and Immigrants.

Considering that Feminism is largely a White Woman's movement, it tracks.

Atlasatlastatleast · 2024-05-26T04:33:40+00:00

I’m reading an article entitled “Thirty Years of Denying the Evidence on Gender Symmetry in Partner Violence: Implications for Prevention and Treatment” by the late Dr. Murray A. Strauss, who created the conflict tactics scale, the most widely used instrument in research on family violence. In it, he talks about the different ways academics have attempted to conceal findings that there was symmetry in IPV. Here’s method 6:

Method 6: Prevent Funding of Research to Investigate Female Partner Violence

In December 2005, the National Institute of Justice invited grant proposals to investigate PV and sexual violence. It stated that studies involving men victims are not eligible for funding

There are other ways I’ve seen that seem to have fun with statistics or the interpretation of them. This reason.com article entitled “Stop Saying Women Are More Likely Than Men To Be Murdered At Work” shows how workplace deaths have been reported about in…fun ways. The following is from a Washington post article

Out of nearly 4,600 workplace deaths in 2013, 9 percent were caused by homicides…It's a pattern that disproportionately affects women. After car accidents, homicide is the most likely way for women to die at work, representing 21 percent of workplace deaths.

The critique from reason.com

I could nitpick his claim that the problem "disproportionately affects women," given that they made up less than 17 percent of all workplace homicides. But it's true that of those women who died at work that year, a significant portion of them—about one in five—were murder victims.

The problem is that the raw number of women who die at work in a year is extraordinarily small. In fact, there were more men murdered at work in 2013 (341) than there were women who died at work of any cause at all (321).

There are other similar issues I’ve noticed as well.

wardenferry419 · 2024-05-25T22:54:49+00:00

Don't argue with the feminist overlords or wind up the shit/hit list.

_Kaminchen_ · 2024-05-26T10:37:04+00:00

Because the majority of political, psychological and societal science is heavily tilted towards personal agenda. This does not neccessarily have to mean the outcome is useless, but it is less likely to be properly tried and tested.

In case of the feminist bubble it extremely bad, because the viewpoint of those who peer review these works, are heavily limiting their scope of vision. Some central tenets like the patriachal world view limit the ability to think of other problems/solutions/options during an honest peer review, therefore inherently skewing data and conclusions.

This phenomenon is not exclusive to feminists, the men's right's movement faces the same uphill battle.

It is often much easier to fault the other side of wrongdoing instead of painstakingly searching for more explanations which do not support your agendas, but might even contradict them. This is just the problem of flawed humans circumventing the scientific method.

Media pick up and broadcast what they believe will get them views, attention and rile up discussion. That is most of their business model. Transparent reporting while trying to be as close to an unbiased neutral position is almost extinct nowadays. If you are the expert in anything and see it brought up in the news or papers, you will come to find tons of flaws and plainly wrong facts in their reports. Journalists are usually no experts in other areas and it takes an incredible amount of time, dedication and help to delve deep enough into a very specific topic to create a transparent and unbiased report about it.

The in-group-bias towards others is strong in such divisive topics. It takes a lot of effort to be sceptic of every piece of information, especially if it is brought to you by a friend or someone likeminded. Feminists arent the only ones falling for this. There is a good reason for people to write here instead of r/MensRights. Unfounded bullshit always comes out faster and more frequently than you are able to refute them, hence Brandolini's law.

M_Salvatar · 2024-05-26T13:18:13+00:00

Still on the 1 in 4 homeless people are women thing.

Mate, you have no idea how much that one pissed me off. But no problem, getting a few guys across the world to figure out how to buy land, and built men only shelter villages. We'll get there, and keep going from there.

Dashing2026 · 2024-05-26T01:27:16+00:00

Because their rejection could beget accusations of misogyny.

mynuname · 2024-05-26T16:35:24+00:00

Confirmation bias affects everyone.

snippychicky22 · 2024-05-26T18:38:41+00:00

Most homeless are men, yet female only homeless shelters are way to common

Delicious-Tea-6718 · 2024-05-27T07:25:47+00:00

disproven stuff like "they only crash test cars on male bodies" gets to keep circulating because if you say something you're assumed to be both wrong and hating women.. or something

dr_pepper02 · 2024-05-27T08:49:19+00:00

It’s because the feminists have control of the media, just look at how Amber Heard was treated by the media. Everything she said was taken as truth, and even when she was found guilty they still treated her as a victim.

Lena Dunham the media rushed to protect and defend her, making excuses for her book knowing full well the response would have been different.

When one controls the media they control the narrative surrounding whatever issue.

I’d think part of their strategy is to yell, scream and stomp their feet to get their way. They’ll criticize male behavior yet cheer on women for doing the very same.

They love to point out male violence but have to problem stand along side those men to reap the benefits of said men, they’ll even say men are obsolete and unnecessary while reaping the benefits of male labor.

tritisan · 2024-05-26T16:38:10+00:00

The “Honey you have a nail in your forehead “ video explains the underlying reason hilariously and truthfully.

Women want their feelings validated. Men prefer facts and logic.

Women in groups use rapport talk. Men use report talk.

All sane cultures recognize this human condition and adjust their social structures accordingly. Unfortunately we do not live in a sane society.

eli_ashe · 2024-05-27T19:49:53+00:00

the online feministas are holding to the following basic ethical principal:

if it is good for women, then it is correct.

if it is bad for men or queers, it is correct.

this because the believe, erroneously, that women are an oppressed class of people under and overarching patriarchy (patriarchal realism).

this is why their claims are basically accepted uncritically, which is OP question. we may also posit things like in-grouping or confirmation bias, but fundamentally on a theoretically level this is what is going on. if you change those, you change their responses.

cause it is always worth mentioning, the claims bout the stats on sa and rape are bad.

in this case they are essentially referring to rates of cases that have gone to trial (which have gone through many filtration processes), and trying to apply them to rates of cases that were already excluded from going to trial for one reason or another. there are other issues too with what they do, ultimately its just playing with numbers rather than bothering to look at any evidence tho.

Revolutionary_Law793 · 2024-05-26T01:19:29+00:00

2% to 10%

pwishall · 2024-05-26T11:42:50+00:00

The "2-8%" false accusations thing is not real. Most people don't understand how to infer things from statistics.

Those were only the ones proven false and officially recorded as that. Most false accusations get dropped at an earlier stage because of lack of evidence.

Sleeksnail · 2024-05-27T04:39:19+00:00

They make use of statistics not to have a better understanding of reality but instead as a magic talisman of Truth.

Here's a question to ask them:

They choose to get all of their rape statistics from police data, which we know is extremely biased. But they take it as gospel truth. Ask them why they don't apply that same assumption to police statistics about crime and "race".

What's that, policing is designed to be bigoted in its laws and application and that results in unrealistic and oppressive "data"? How about that.

coping_man · 2024-06-01T10:33:31+00:00

because feminists are a trade union where they defend even their most toxic members as if they're all sleeping with each other and they're all related by blood as long as they can gang up on a male.

AskingToFeminists · 2024-05-29T16:50:19+00:00

Basically ? The tyranny of female hypoagency and the Rationalisation hammster are playing tricks on us great apes with anxiety.

Also How feminism conned society, and other not-so-tall tales...

RVN3NT · 2025-07-12T16:56:56+00:00

i also hatw how the claim patriarchy bc the majority of ceos, government officials, etc are men. whycdoes that make us a patriarchy? maybe most women just dont want to be politicians

Sure-Vermicelli4369 · 2024-05-26T14:09:27+00:00

Women think emotionally, men think logically. This is why you won't see empathy for men's causes; if it's not something that directly affects them, they can't conceptualize it.

Now factor in the "women are wonderful" effect and you have a society that will take every statement made by a woman at face value even if the claim has no merit.

In a rare turn for me, I'm actually just frustrated and confused by this as opposed to feeling a burning hatred

This is just you becoming desensitized from the rampant everyday misandry.

Title	Why are so many Feminist statistics accepted without scrutiny?
Author	Low-Philosopher-2354
Upvotes	229
Comments	65
Date	May 25, 2024 7:57 PM UTC (2 years ago)
Subreddit	Posted in /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
Original Link	https://old.reddit.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/comments/1d0k5j7/why_are_so_many_feminist_statistics_accepted/
Archive Link	https://theredarchive.com/r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates/why-are-so-many-feminist-statistics-accepted.1519528 https://theredarchive.com/post/1519528

Comments