While we can count terrorism rates very accurately, it is not nearly the same with sexual harassment or bias. Terrorism is very public and hard to conceal, sexual harassment is hidden and costly to talk about if you are typical victim.
common perception seems to be that women face a level of harassment hugely disproportionate to that experienced by men, however studies don't show such a large gap
#1) The study shows that 4x as many women than man have been stalked. It also shows that 2x as many women have experienced sexual harassment compared to men.
#2) This data shows % of people that have ever been harassed. It doesn't quantify the amount of harassment per person. It's a reasonable to think that not only are more women harassed, each one is likely harassed more intensely.
but experienced doesn't in any way means that every woman that experienced harassment experienced it from one unique male each time (which is probably the least likely implication of all)
That's not the claim I was making though. What I said was that we don't know if it's a minority of men who are harassing women. The stats don't tell us that. The assertion that it's very few men doesn't really hold water though, simply because women everywhere report the same experiences. Consequently there are men everywhere who are harassing women.
It is a classical classroom example case of misrepresentation of statistic to make discriminatory remark, or shift the blame to a group.
I'm not misrepresenting the statistics. I'm saying that the statistics tell us there's a massive problem with sexual harassment of women and we don't know if that's from a minority or a majority of men. You're not using the statistics when you say it's a minority of men. You're making an unfounded and unproven assumption.
I would hope that it's not a majority of men, but whether it's 1%, or 5%, or 25% of men isn't something I'd like to even guess at. My partner tells me that it's far closer to 25% than 1% though, and I believe her.
A study in the early 90s found women featured 35 times as much as victims in Canadian news headlines than men. Not a typo.
Yes, this is just one data point, but it's a pretty unambiguous one. And of course, such studies tend to only happen once, as people with feminist agendas tend to ensure they do not get confirmed.
Do you think this might skew your perception of how often people of either gender get harassed?
On the lower end of harassment there is no way catcalling is roughly even between the sexes. In particular venues it might be roughly even, but in the world at large, no way.
On the more violent end of rape the majority of serial rapists I've heard about are men. And while some of them are homosexual rapists, most are heterosexual rapists.
Even if there are a few number of offenders, there’s a system that supports those offenders/distrusts those who reports incidents.
Otherwise, how would you explain why this happens? Logically, the women to whom something happened would say something. But statistics show that most don’t, or that most only communicate to close friends, despite stats from the original article.
So we know that incidents are rampant. We also know that most men don’t know this, as represented by the surprise at this article as evidenced in this thread.
We can only deduce that there is an emergent dynamic that actively discourages women from speaking up and encourages/allows these offenders to continue. This might look like bias by men that men are blind to. This might look like messages that discourage women. It’s only logical that men wouldn’t be able to see this and that men would have huge blind spots around sexual harassment issues.
(And of course, this is what women have been saying continuously — if only men would listen.)
Furthermore, the correlation with Trump approval is totally fishy. These numbers don't rule out the possibility that men harass women at roughly the same rates regardless, and self-report differently due to their awareness of the issue.
Self-reported. Not a random population. The numbers are higher because most men (the ones who refused to take part) are intelligent enough to not denounce themselves to the NYT for serious sexual offences. Not reliable, and may do more harm than good, because it maximizes minor harassment, but minimizes the numbers of serious harassment.
I didn't mean to imply that it's common, but sexual harassment is much more common. I was trying to make a point about women facing a whole class of issues that men don't face.
You assume sexual harassment is always directed toward women by men.
I'm a man. I was harassed by a woman and lost a promotion.
Until you have reliable data about women's behavior matched to men's, you have no argument. You cannot rely on the prevailing feminist perspective on men and women as a substitute for data.
> Every day ten of thousands of people are being sexually harassed, and a thousand + are being sexually assaulted. We don't hear about the vast majority of these cases, even if they are prosecuted, regardless of the sexes of perpetrator and victim.
Sure, but because of the way male victims are treated, you hear even less about them than about female victims.
I think it's nuanced. Women experience way more sexual harassment and being stalked than men online, even though men as slightly more likely to experience any online harassment in general. I can totally understand being specifically stalked or sexually harassed is on a totally different field than being called a retard for a suboptimal leetcode answer.
It's baffling to me when you keep denying the reality of sexual violence: the perpetrators are overwhelmingly male. The victims are mostly female.
When we look at online harassment we see more male than female perpetrators, and more female than male victims, especially when we look at the most serious offences.
That doesn't address my point that women are way more likely to explicitly receive sexual harassment and stalking even when men report receiving more online harassment generally. I'm not arguing that you weren't harassed online, only that harassment is way more nuanced than whether or not everyone was equally victimized.
Of course there are male media personalities who are harassed, and (maybe?) female media personalities who aren't. The point is that no rational person could possibly claim that the frequency and severity is the same for writers/hosts/etc. of both genders.
Very interesting that men experienced sexual assault almost twice as much as women. Yet I've never seen a media witch hunt for female aggressors (maybe it's happened, I've just never seen it.)
reply