Timeline for Are these rape statistics correct regarding rapes of black women by white men between 2003 and 2008 in USA?
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
22 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sep 21, 2017 at 15:31 | comment | added | DavePhD | @jamesqf The data is survey based and is unrelated to whether or not the victim reported the crime. Random households are contacted and there is an attempt to interview all the people 12 years old and older in the household. | |
| Sep 21, 2017 at 14:29 | comment | added | PoloHoleSet | Just to be clear, is the claim being forwarded, with the statistical reference, that white people never rape black victims? | |
| Sep 20, 2017 at 13:44 | answer | added | DavePhD | timeline score: 11 | |
| Sep 20, 2017 at 12:37 | history | edited | JasonR | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Changed title to be "skeptical"
|
| Sep 20, 2017 at 10:44 | history | edited | Worse_Username | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
edited title
|
| Sep 20, 2017 at 9:12 | comment | added | tim | @Worse_Username I think it's basically still the same overall claim as it's always referencing the same survey in the same flawed way. But you're right, the question title doesn't fit that well anymore, so please feel free to change it (the easiest way would probably be to replace "2006" with "2008" (which is also the last year the survey included these stats); it's not reflecting the claim 100% as it doesn't mention 2007, but the report for that year exists, so I think it should be fine; alternatively, you could just reference 2008 in the title, or revert/re-edit the question itself). | |
| Sep 20, 2017 at 9:03 | comment | added | Worse_Username | @tim the new image is for 2008. Should the question be changed? | |
| Sep 20, 2017 at 6:39 | history | edited | tim | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
swapped in more notable (and less visually shocking) image
|
| Sep 20, 2017 at 4:32 | comment | added | jamesqf | This suffers from the same obvious flaw that most criminal statistics do. Statistics can only be applied to data that is recorded. So if 1) many black rape victims choose not to report the rape to the police, or 2) police reports don't record the race of the victim (both of which seem quite plausible), then any statistics will be inaccurate. | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:56 | answer | added | tim | timeline score: 23 | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:39 | history | tweeted | twitter.com/StackSkeptic/status/910272148975099904 | ||
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:29 | comment | added | Nat | Also, if these are the results of surveys, I wonder if we might be able to find aggregated crime statistics that are summed up from crimes reported to police? Seems like raw numbers would be more interesting than extrapolations. | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:13 | comment | added | Nat | @tim Yeah, trying to check into the source of the numbers though. I mean, I'd assumed that these were crime statistics summed up from various police departments and such, where the less-than-10-cases thing meant that there were less-than-10-white-on-black rapes. Seems like the explicit claim's a lot weaker if it's really a questionable extrapolation. | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:11 | comment | added | tim | @Nat Well, it's called the "National Crime Victimization Survey", and the post seems to raise some (or a lot of) valid issues. But either way, this is really my point. The numbers aren't a claim, the interpretation is. And here we need a notable interpretation. Though as the article I linked to says, this is a claim David Duke made, so it probably is notable. | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:04 | history | edited | Worse_Username | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 125 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:01 | comment | added | tim | @Worse_Username Here would be a source interpreting those numbers differently (basically, the numbers are real, but the interpretation by the image is not; which is exactly why a notable source for the actual claim - not the statistics - is important. The image in that post might actually serve as notable claim though, as it seems far more wide-spread). | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 22:01 | comment | added | tim | @Worse_Username Thanks. But without any actual claim, those are just a bunch of statistics which don't have all that much meaning. It's the interpretation the image is making that is relevant, not the statistics (and as Phi mentioned, if we doubt the official stats, what will we accept as proof?). | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 21:58 | comment | added | Nat | This does seem like a case where there's an implicit claim too, but exactly what that implicit claim might be seems a bit fuzzy. | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 21:50 | history | edited | Worse_Username | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 382 characters in body
|
| Sep 19, 2017 at 21:40 | comment | added | user22684 | I have checked the Bureau of Justice statistics site shown and this is indeed what the linked Department of Justice statistics show. Why do you doubt these statistics? | |
| Sep 19, 2017 at 21:22 | review | First posts | |||
| Sep 20, 2017 at 3:01 | |||||
| Sep 19, 2017 at 21:19 | history | asked | Worse_Username | CC BY-SA 3.0 |