Hi all.

Let's discuss this paper:

This paper suggests that false rape allegations are 5.9% (actually, between 2% and 10%): - It is referenced by Assessing Police Classifications of Sexual Assault Reports: A Meta-Analysis of False Reporting Rates, which makes the same claim… - … which is referenced by Challenging misconceptions about sexual offending: creating an evidence‑based resource for police and legal practitioners, which claims 5% … - which is referenced by Guys, you can stop worrying about false rape allegations. They’re extremely rare , which also claims 5%, and adds that we can stop worrying about false rape allegations. We will get back to this later.

All cases of sexual assault reported to a major Northeastern university over a 10 year period were analyzed by the authors to determine the percentage of false allegations.

The introduction to the paper mentions (and this will be useful later):

For centuries, it has been asserted and assumed that women “cry rape,” that a largeproportion of rape allegations are maliciously concocted for purposes of revenge or other motives.

The paper defines false report as cases where there was evidence that a thorough investigation was pursued and that the investigation had yielded evidence that the reported sexual assault had in fact not occurred.

It's important to realize, then, that they are not measuring the percentage of untrue allegations, but of allegations where a thorough investigation produced evidence that it was false. If the accuser didn't cooperate with the investigators, if there was no evidence that the allegation was true and even if the accuserreported inconsistent facts about the event, the allegation is not a false report under this definition.

And they really count fucking everything as a counterexample: cases where evidence was insufficient, cases where the accuser withdrew the allegation, and even cases that the researches didn't have enough information to classify: they do classify them anyways, as counterexamples (rather than excluding them).

Despite all of this, they still reached a total of nearly 6%.

But again, this is not, and should not be misunderstood as, the percentage of reports which are untruthful. This is merely the percentage of false reports according to their definition.

The rest includes allegations which are just as untrue, but for which no evidence has been produced that they are untrue. How many allegations are not true? We still do not know.

Now, remember the article claiming we can stop worriying about false allegations? Remember that this exact paper mentioned "rape allegations maliciously concocted for purposes of revenge or other motives".

It should be noted that this is a clear case of equivocation.

Any rape allegation maliciously concocted for purposes of revenge or other motives is not a false report unless there is actual evidence that the fact didn't happen.

It literally isn't a false report. They defined the term "false report" that way.

But those scared of untrue rape allegations, or allegations forged maliciously concocted for purposes of revenge or other motives, are not afraid of false reports.

"False reports" are fine: they are the 6% of cases in which evidence is actually produced that the rape didn't happen. They are a non-issue for the accused.

The issue, that which people are afraid of, reasonably and justly, are all remaining cases, which include both rapes which did happen, but also rapes which absolutely didn't.

In essence: - What the data actually says: In 6% of cases of rape reports, a thorough investigations produces evidence that the rape did in fact not occour. - What the data is used to say: Of all cases of rape allegation, only 5% are not truthful, there is nothing to worry about!