Re: Women don't lie about rape.

Neil <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>...
> Rich <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message:
> news:[EMAIL PROTECTED]: 
> 
> > I noted in passing that Daran had been unable to find anyone
> > who says that women never lie about rape.
> > 
> > Seems lots of orginizations say just that. I wonder why his
> > google search failed.
> 
> For the same reason that yours did (Hi Rich) -

Hi Neil.

> all of your cites say 
> pretty much (if not exactly) the same thing,

Interesting, ain't it?

> that women don't lie about 
> rape and that the rate of false reports is 2 (-4)%.  None of them say, 
> explicitly, that women *never* lie about rape.

I disagree, that's what "women don't lie about rape" means. 
They then contradict it with the 2-4% claim, but that's what's
out there.

> But actually, i'm glad that you raised the subject again because it made 
> me think about it again.  Clearly the 'women don't lie' line is intended 
> to convey the message that they never lie -

There is no difference, the claim is the same with slightly
different wording.

> and clearly following it with 
> the ("only") 2% claim is intended to dismiss the number that do as being 
> negligible.

Said claim being echoed here many times my many different women
(and some men). See any connection?

> This context contradicts the absolute 'never' impression, 

Clearly, but this is what's there. And I daresay that if you read
the literature at any such orginization, it will say pretty much the
same thing.

> hence the need to minimise it, but more importantly it contradicts a 
> previous claim of mine in discussion with you about absolute statements 
> (at least, i think it does.  i can't remember what i said).  i probably 
> owe you an apology, although i personally think that the wording of these 
> organisations is (deliberately) sloppy.

Perhaps it's like lumping all sort of non-violent things in with
the DV stats to inflate the DV numbers? It's like lumping rape and
attempted rape together and implying that your figures are for rape.

> > As for Daran's claim that the number of false rape accusations
> > is probably in the double digits (i.e., less than 100), that's
> > silly. Kanin's study alone found 109. Walter (??) has posted
> > over 60, one women in the list made 7 false rape accusations.
> 
> His 'double digit' claim was for convictions, not accusations.

Eh? I'll have to go back and re-read it. I may be mistaken here.

> As there 
> appear to have been around 700 (i think) overturned convictions (for all 
> crimes) to date in the US, i suspect that he's a little low with that 
> claim, but not much.  That doesn't mean that there aren't more - he was 
> talking about what he'd seen evidence for, and clearly a lot of evidence 
> isn't made available.

Odd that I had a different impression. Perhaps a side-effect of the
particular posts I was reading at the time.

Rich


Erratum: I finally recovered the data I had thought lost on the
         computer I fixed a bit ago. I was afraid to boot it up
         lest I overwrite the data. Perhaps I'll respond again to
         JJ's email. I recall reading of someone who sent a postcard
         and email every day for a year as a test. Every postcard
         arrived, but quite a few emails did not. I fear my email
         to JJ fell into that category. One of the files I recovered
         was my inbox from attbi. 

> [...]
> 
> > Rich (who needs an ISP with news).