US media very quiet about interracial rape. - Page 3 - Politics Forum.org | PoFo

Wandering the information superhighway, he came upon the last refuge of civilization, PoFo, the only forum on the internet ...

Language, bias, ownership, influence; all media related topics.
Forum rules: No one line posts please.
#14674753
Maybe TIG sir, you missed the title of the thread. My one and only point was that the main stream media never mentions this. However as you surely must know...in the extremely rare cases when the races are reversed, it is National front page news and there is outrage.

Double standards?
#14674756
Scamp wrote:http://www.bjs.gov/index.cfm?ty=pbse&sid=58

Here is the link I already provided. It is the US Dept of Justice statistics.

Second paragraph down Criminal Victimization in the United States 2008-Statistical table. 2008 is the last year before US Attorney Gen Holder stopped the publishing of such stats.

Victims and offenders Table 42. Rape/sexual assault. A quick mathematical equation shows...

19,292 black on white rapes
0 white on black rapes.

Funny that is the exact number on the conservative website I posted originally that the people on this thread refused to believe.

The truth is heavy. Some choose not to carry it.


Scamp wrote:However as you surely must know...in the extremely rare cases when the races are reversed, it is National front page news and there is outrage.


Criminal Victimization in the United States, 2008 wrote:Page 29 - Table 42
Rape/sexual assault [victim]: Black only - 46,580
Perceived race of offender: White - 0*

*Estimate is based on 10 or fewer sample cases.


We don't know how rare it is. Judging from the other violent stats, where white-on-black violence is roughly 15-20% (with much of the data so limited that less than 10 cases were analyzed), one could estimate, logically, that a similar stat would be true for white-on-black rape.

It's genuinely odd that you seem confused about the fact that a data set for tens of thousands of people, with less than 10 people's cases analyzed for that particular data, is not accurate or reliable. I understand that race is super important to you, and people would be saying the exact same thing if the data for black-on-white rape was as inaccurate and unreliable.

You also keep ignoring points people in this thread bring up, such as prison rape and so on.
#14674780
The Immortal Goon wrote:
In fact, it has been debunked many times each time you post.


I posted documents showing 135,206 black on white rapes in 6 years.

You posted one single case where a white policeman raped 13 black women.

Are you bad at math? Or just desperately trying to deflect from the truth?
#14674781
So I wonder why US Attorney General Holder stopped his US Justice Dept from publishing interracial rape statistics as soon as he got in office.
#14674786
I posted documents showing 135,206 black on white rapes in 6 years.


You may remember minutes ago when I went through the numbers via the government's own full and clear statement that the estimates from these numbers were from statistically insignificant sources.

You then threw the numbers out saying that, "My one and only point was that the main stream media never mentions this."

When asked why the media would report on something that didn't hold up numerically, you changed the argument again to standing by the numbers that you imagined were in the report because you didn't read the government's warnings about the unreliability of the numbers.

For your interpretation to be true, you need to not only discount the government's warning about the numbers but:

1. Ignore contemporary cases where whites are raping blacks that are big in the media, as has already been pointed out on two occasions. And then more.

2. Ignore academic work that very clearly demonstrate that rape correlates with poverty far more than race.

3. Ignore that the year in question may have been an anomaly, as has been pointed out, as subsequent years increase very much in white-on-black rapes.

4. Ignore the fact that your conclusion was drawn from an openly biased source that used the data you apparently didn't read closely as a source. This was also already pointed out. More than once.

5. Ignore regional parallels that make your conclusion problematic, as has been pointed out.

6. Ignore historical parallels that make your conclusion problematic, as has been pointed out.

7. Propose a conspiracy theory to make up for your own lack of evidence. Then double down on it.

8. Ignore the fact that rape is massively under-reported and there are sociological, demographic, and historical reasons why white-on-black crimes would be especially underreported—as has been pointed out. And ignore it again when repeated.

9. Ignore requests to address any of these points that make your conclusion problematic.

10. Move the goal posts for what you're actually talking about. Repeatedly.

11. Ignore statistics from other sources that contradict the conclusion that you're drawing.

So I'll ask you—with all of this evidence directly contradicting your conclusion, are you going to even try to address this? Or are you so tied to a delusional reality that you will continue to simply restate a thoroughly debunked conclusion you're trying to draw from statistics that even warn you not to draw the conclusion that you're drawing?
#14674788
That long winded post does not change the numbers...

135,206 to 13.

@SolarCross , you should do a thread on late soci[…]

All we did was define Capitalism SolarCross? If y[…]

The comment was made as a follow up to the peren[…]

I goofed yesterday and posted the April 10 from 18[…]