davidagain
@davidagain@lemmy.world
- Comment on Just seen the latest American Opinion polls. 3 days ago:
In fact, you asserted “he’s not wrong”. He was wrong.
- Comment on Just seen the latest American Opinion polls. 4 days ago:
Black people voted for trump even harder. He’s not wrong though?
Whether grossly misunderstanding, grossly misrepresenting or grossly misinterpreting the data, I don’t know, but I think “wrong” is far more descriptive here than “not wrong”.
Black people voted for trump the least of any ethnic group, by far, at 15%. Asian people 40%, Hispanic people 48% and White people 55%. “Even harder” is bullshit.
- Comment on Just seen the latest American Opinion polls. 5 days ago:
Admit! Better to admit you were wrong. Now I was wrong too! Noooooo!
- Comment on Just seen the latest American Opinion polls. 5 days ago:
Better to about you were wrong than to post this transparent nonsense.
- Comment on Oh, that's... umm.... 6 days ago:
Ah good, thank you.
Seriously fucked up shit going on in supposedly civilised European countries. Wow.
- Comment on Oh, that's... umm.... 6 days ago:
Content not viewable in your region.
Please don’t use imgur. They’re in the rapid enshittification stage. You could upload direct to your instance or use another site.
- Comment on The Confederacy (or whatever) 1 week ago:
You randy bugger!
- Comment on Dyslexia 1 week ago:
I read Goth Clowns Only. If I’m dyslexic, it’s really mild.
- Comment on The Confederacy (or whatever) 1 week ago:
Did you mean to spell it “knot” instead of “not”?!
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
I’m no disposable drone #132,792!
I’m Valued and Well Loved Utterly Disposable and Routinely Replaceable Drone #3,472, I’ll have you know!
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
appreciated
Correction: profited from. They profited from that sacrifice.
- Comment on [deleted] 1 week ago:
This is true, but not in any way helpful.
- Comment on nice 1 week ago:
Ah! So the fabled but rarely found great head does exist!
Contrats, dude, you clearly rock.
I would say let me know next time you’re in my city, but it’s probably not worth jeopardizing my marriage over. My dick kinda disagrees, but it’s never had a good track record of figuring out the long term impact. Nevertheless, respect for the skills there and the enthusiasm. (Dick is liking the word enthusiasm now. Shit, I should just stop typing and get on with my day.)
- Comment on nice 1 week ago:
That was a very frank answer, thank you. Do you yourself get repeat requests, or is it just that no one is particularly impressed by head?
(My wife has never been particularly keen.)
- Comment on nice 1 week ago:
The internet seems to think that gay men have more enthusiasm and understanding than women about what feels good when giving head, and that therefore give much better head. Comments?
- Comment on nice 1 week ago:
Username does not check out.
- Comment on And now I'm reminded I have two of these to repair. 1 week ago:
Content not viewable in your region.
- Comment on grindr dump (in post body) 2 weeks ago:
Great username, by the way.
- Comment on grindr dump (in post body) 2 weeks ago:
More gay? More gay than what?
- Comment on grindr dump (in post body) 2 weeks ago:
Every day is learning day here on lemmy.
- Comment on Why don't cars have a way to contact nearby cars like fictional spaceships do? 2 weeks ago:
I think you two live in different counties and actually agree.
- Comment on From what I've seen, public transit is either expensive and terrible or cheap and good. 2 weeks ago:
The initial investment can be very expensive, yes, but a good underground system or largely off-road overground system in a city can be profitable from reasonable fares because of the sheer quantity of passengers it can move per hour.
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
You can take issue with that certainly, but I didn’t put her dad in the stranger category.
Ah, youre one of them…
What? One of whom?
- Comment on Always question those who are the "teachers" 2 weeks ago:
To be fair, that’s absolutely the first thing you should try if you’re using windows. Solves all sorts of problems. Oh, wait, now I get it. Ah.
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
Not sure what it is that you arent getting here
1.9m/170m = 1% per year. That doesn’t add up to 0.7% per lifetime. I don’t know how you can think that more women get raped per year than get raped per lifetime. It didn’t add up, which is why I questioned it.
Thanks for quoting CDC as your source, which helped. I couldn’t find particularly recent data, but the 2016/2017 survey said:
One in 4 women (26.8% or 33.5 million) in the United States reported completed or attempted rape victimization at some point in her lifetime.
Two percent (2.3% or about 2.9 million) reported rape victimization in the 12 months before the survey.
Table 1 quotes 54.3% for lifetime contact sexual violence for women, and 47% unwanted sexual contact. You quoted significantly fewer (480 000) sexual assaults than rapes (1.9 million) which still doesn’t add up, no matter how much you swear at me.
No, a womans real issue with rape and sexually assault happens when she gets home. Fathers, uncles, brothers, husbands, boyfriends, are all in that 90% bracket. So walk the streets ladies, it would seem that you dont have to worry about anything until you get home…
They’re in the 34% bracket according to the CDC - see data below.
Still, doesnt really change the point, doest it? The men that pose the greatest threat to women, are not strangers. I dont know how youre fucking brain works, but strangers = people you dont know. Seeing you explain how the fuck fathers, uncles, brothers, are in the same category as strangers will be a fun fucking read.
Relationship of victim to rapist before the incident:
Current or former intimate partner: 26%
Another relative: 7%
Friend or acquaintance: 38%
Stranger: 26%so maybe women should exercise caution going out (38% + 26% = 64%) more than staying in (26% + 7% = 34%).
Actually, as you can see from my figures, I put the fathers, uncles, brothers in the same category as the intimate partners - the home category.
I was assuming that family and partners/former partners would be at home and the friends, acquaintances and strangers would be met when they went out. You can take issue with that certainly, but I didn’t put her dad in the stranger category.
Anyway, I think that we can agree that being alone with a man is perhaps where the risk lies for women, whether that’s at home or outside.
Occasionally you make very good points, but you’re unnecessarily abusive to people who make even minor corrections, and I get the impression that you don’t read your posts or your replies terribly carefully, preferring to shout than check.
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
Um your math isn’t mathing here:
In the US, 1.9 million women are raped every year. As for sexual assaults, thats 480,000 a year.
I think all rape is also sexual assault and I suspect that sexual assault that doesn’t go as far as rape is more common than rape. Did you mean 1.9 thousand, or 19 thousand, or do sexual assaults that aren’t rape go massively unreported?
In the US, 1.9 million women are raped every year. There are over 170 million women and girls in the US right now.
(about 1% per year)
there is a 0.6 to 0.7% chance that a woman will be raped in her life time.
(about 1% per lifetime)
These two are also inconsistent, which leads me to suspect that you got the order of magnitude wrong on the US rapes somehow.
In search of a number, I tried en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rape_in_the_United_States where I found
Relationship of victim to rapist before the incident:
Current or former intimate partner: 26%
Another relative: 7%
Friend or acquaintance: 38%
Stranger: 26%so maybe women should exercise caution going out (38% + 26% = 64%) more than staying in (26% + 7% = 34%).
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
Me neither, MrSulu, me neither.
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
MrSulu, you stud! I heard that gay men get more sex, but that’s a bold attempt. Does Brad now about this?!
- Comment on She is making a GREAT point 2 weeks ago:
If the numbers were correct and your aim was to reduce pregnancies, you could prevent 90% of pregnancies by getting roughly 90% of sexually active women to take the pill. Getting 99.95% of sexually active men to take the pill would have NO effect whatsoever on the pregnancy rate, because the remaining 1 in 2000 men would continue to meet and impregnate a woman roughly once every hours for roughly 12 hours a day with breaks for food and resting his dick for 9 months straight, with time to visit 430 women a second time in case these miracle impregnators somehow didn’t always impregnate on first meeting a woman. (This would very drastically reduce diversity in the gene pool and the world would be very very very badly interbred within two generations.)
But of course humans don’t behave like the numbers suggest AT ALL, thank goodness.
- Comment on I'm sure the liberals have a great explanation 3 weeks ago:
I don’t know, but I’m certainly not sure that the Italian liberal-national party was liberal any more than the German national socialist party was socialist.