Avatar

ObjectivityIncarnate

damnedfurry@lemmy.world
Joined
0 posts • 353 comments
Direct message

The image is shopped, and it’s a fake person anyway, lmao

permalink
report
parent
reply

i really don’t care if it’s a misleading or misquoted stat.

I’m frankly not surprised. Decent, honest people do, though, hence my effort to reveal that it is, in fact, a bogus stat, so that said people will know to disregard both it, and those like you, who continue to spread it in the name of their narrative despite knowing it’s bogus.

People who care more about maintaining and propagating their biases/prejudices than about being honest and truthful, are abhorrent scum, and don’t belong in civilized society.

permalink
report
parent
reply

In the language of the law, the Ten Commandments are “foundational documents of our state and national government.”

Uh, no they fucking aren’t, lmao

permalink
report
reply

No one shoplifts formula to feed their own baby, they steal it to literally scalp it to those who actually do need it, at a fat markup, after conveniently draining the store’s supply so they’re the only source.

They’re not Robin Hoods sticking it to the Big Bad Corporation. They’re profiteering scumbags.

permalink
report
parent
reply

Turn him down and he yells, calls the woman names, maybe attacks her now or later, stalks her, rapes her, murders her, kills a kid, shoots up a mall, or mows down a crowd with a van, or…

Definitely common everyday occurrences and not massively-cherry picked sensationalism.

women fear being killed

A completely irrational fear in the US at least, given that in a country of 340,000,000, less than 5,000 women are murdered a year. And that’s even if you pretended every single murder was by a rejected man.

Stop letting ideological propaganda make you paranoid.

permalink
report
parent
reply

$500 says you’ve never replied to a post where a woman implies her ex-husband was a bad person with “I hate my ex husband, haha, men bad”

permalink
report
parent
reply

Hello, you seem to be referencing an often misquoted statistic. TL:DR; The 40% number is wrong and plain old bad science. In attempt to recreate the numbers, by the same researchers, they received a rate of 24%, but only while considering acts like shouting as violence. Further researchers found rates of 7%, 7.8%, 10%, and 13% with stricter definitions and better research methodology.

The 40% claim is intentionally misleading and unequivocally inaccurate. Numerous studies over the years report domestic violence rates in police families as low as 7%, with the highest at 40% defining violence to include shouting or a loss of temper. The referenced study where the 40% claim originates is Neidig, P.H…, Russell, H.E. & Seng, A.F. (1992). Interspousal aggression in law enforcement families: A preliminary investigation. It states:

Survey results revealed that approximately 40% of the participating officers reported marital conflicts involving physical aggression in the previous year.

There are a number of flaws with the aforementioned study:

The study includes as ‘violent incidents’ a one time push, shove, shout, loss of temper, or an incidents where a spouse acted out in anger. These do not meet the legal standard for domestic violence. This same study reports that the victims reported a 10% rate of physical domestic violence from their partner. The statement doesn’t indicate who the aggressor is; the officer or the spouse. The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The “domestic violence” acts are not confirmed as actually being violent. The study occurred nearly 30 years ago. This study shows minority and female officers were more likely to commit the DV, and white males were least likely. Additional reference from a Congressional hearing on the study: https://babel.hathitrust.org/cgi/pt?id=umn.31951003089863c

An additional study conducted by the same researcher, which reported rates of 24%, suffer from additional flaws:

The study is a survey and not an empirical scientific study. The study was not a random sample, and was isolated to high ranking officers at a police conference. This study also occurred nearly 30 years ago.

More current research, including a larger empirical study with thousands of responses from 2009 notes, ‘Over 87 percent of officers reported never having engaged in physical domestic violence in their lifetime.’ Blumenstein, Lindsey, Domestic violence within law enforcement families: The link between traditional police subculture and domestic violence among police (2009). Graduate Theses and Dissertations. http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/1862

Yet another study “indicated that 10 percent of respondents (148 candidates) admitted to having ever slapped, punched, or otherwise injured a spouse or romantic partner, with 7.2 percent (110 candidates) stating that this had happened once, and 2.1 percent (33 candidates) indicating that this had happened two or three times. Repeated abuse (four or more occurrences) was reported by only five respondents (0.3 percent).” A.H. Ryan JR, Department of Defense, Polygraph Institute “The Prevalence of Domestic Violence in Police Families.” http://webapp1.dlib.indiana.edu/virtual_disk_library/index.cgi/4951188/FID707/Root/New/030PG297.PDF

Another: In a 1999 study, 7% of Baltimore City police officers admitted to ‘getting physical’ (pushing, shoving, grabbing and/or hitting) with a partner. A 2000 study of seven law enforcement agencies in the Southeast and Midwest United States found 10% of officers reporting that they had slapped, punched, or otherwise injured their partners. L. Goodmark, 2016, BRIGHAM YOUNG UNIVERSITY LAW REVIEW “Hands up at Home: Militarized Masculinity and Police Officers Who Commit Intimate Partner Abuse “. https://digitalcommons.law.umaryland.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=2519&context=fac_pubs

permalink
report
reply

Seriously, all the same ‘plays’ too:

  • lol rofl you think I was actually asking?
  • you’re ugly anyway
  • (if the rejection is based on you already being in a relationship) she’s ugly, you’ll never find someone as hot as me
  • (if you’re single) you’re gay/you’re a f*ggot
  • (slur related to your race, more common if the rejected is of a different race)
permalink
report
parent
reply

How Did This Happen?

College loans are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Simple as that.

With lenders knowing that the government will make sure they get paid, they’re happy to loan out any amount of money to anyone regardless of credit worthiness, because they take on literally zero risk.

Then colleges realize the same, and jack up their prices in turn. The feedback loop brings us to where we are today. There is no market (or other) force putting any downward pressure on tuition costs, at all. This is the inevitable result.

permalink
report
reply