Sex offenders at work

[Vera]

Also, Tres never said, “no women ever rape.”  She said most rapes are committed by men, which is true, so what’s with the strawman?

StrawMAN? Women straw as much as men do, we're just being lied about it but thank god I'm here to enlighten you.

[JesseB]

@JesseB
You don’t get to make the claim: ‘those  studies are shit and the data is wrong’, without backing that claim up. Telling other people to ‘do the math and figure out the true numbers’ is simply shifting the burden of proof onto someone else. If you are objecting to data from a particular study, it’s your responsibility to provide reason and evidence to support your objection...

That's Jesse's major shortcoming on these topics.  He seems to think he's smarter and
more well-informed than hundreds of Government and independent statisticians the
world over.  Laughably, he was even telling me my own Aussie crime stats were bullshit LOL.

You'll note he's too lazy to provide any of his own statistics to support his repeated claims
that everybody else's are erroneous.  Which is why I gave up responding to him in this
particular thread.  Interestingly, like a lot of millennials, he thinks he knows it all, and won't
be told.

EDIT:  I just noticed this comment of his—which indicates he has zero knowledge of how to
interpret statistics.  He gets this so wrong it's embarrassing.

"Also orphaned statistics can also leave people with the wrong impression. Why do you think
people say 79% of all violent crimes are committed by men? They leave out the complimentary
bit that it's 79% of 1% of the total population of men..."

—I'm still laughing.     

Perhaps I worded it wrong. Or maybe I'm wrong. Mind explaining?

If 79% (and that's not the actual number) of violent crimes are done by men, and 1% of the population are in jail, then 79% of 1% commit violent crimes yes? Roughly speaking. The point is to put into perspective just how few men are really as violent vs what some people want to imply. 

But I could be saying it wrong. I think you get my meaning ya?

[LadyforCamus]

@JesseB

Meh? But, we’re not comparing the percept men who have committed violent crimes to the number of men who haven’t. We comparing the percent of violent crimes committed by men versus the percent committed by women. No one is saying that most men are rapists.

[JesseB]

@JesseB

Meh?   But, we’re not comparing the percept men who have committed violent crimes to the number of men who haven’t. We comparing the percent of violent crimes committed by men versus the percent committed by women.  No one is saying that most men are rapists.

Actually the thread contained both, and they got mixed up at times too....but that's nitpicking. Or maybe I'm wrong.... there were 3 threads on this general topic..... hard to keep em straight at times... oh well.

My only real point was that women do it more than people want to believe and some people came to accept my point. Mission accomplished there. I had a secondary point I want to make and kinda half assed tried to make that there's bias in how we gather and look at this stuff which enables things to go unnoticed.... but ya... that one I just can't back up well enough yet. Like I said, workin on it

I guess my 3rd partial point was just to stand in opposition to the lopsided attacks going on. In that regard I've become something like the position I'm used to a rodeo clown or punching bag for abuse. Just like when I'd get in my dads face and get punched so my brothers wouldn't get hit. There are others on this forum who haven't risked their reputations voicing some of the criticisms I've so utterly failed to make properly (that they could probably do better at) who don't feel safe voicing any opposing view. And they aren't right wing nutters either. I mean I could understand some extremist right wing person not feeling totally comfortable saying what they think on a forum like this, but these are pretty liberal left people who used to be active on TTA who just aren't now because of a shift in the makeup and culture as things came over to the new forum. It's kinda whatever. I'll say what I think while respecting the rules. And be me and maybe I get banned one day for it maybe I don't. Maybe if I'm lucky the people I wish were here will come back to us. That and I don't know why some people left, like I don't know why mom left. I miss her, she was great. I just know why some people aren't very active here. 

Now I'm not defending sex offenders, or sex offenders at work. Like I said sometimes a bond of trust is broken and can never be made whole again ya? I do generally hate how people do a crime, do the time pay their debt to society and then are never welcomed back into society. But how do you trust a sex offender again? most won't and I know why. Same reason I won't. Maybe they should instead just be sent off to live in their own community or something idk.

[JesseB]

Double post deleted

[JesseB]

@JesseB

Meh?   But, we’re not comparing the percept men who have committed violent crimes to the number of men who haven’t. We comparing the percent of violent crimes committed by men versus the percent committed by women.  No one is saying that most men are rapists.

Also, I mean you might know this? But people say a lot of shit about me anyway. They did on TTA too. I'm not unaware of how some people attempted to bully people into not even talking to me via PM's.

I mean don't get me wrong, I kinda wish people wouldn't tell me about it? I don't really care. People who act like that are saying a lot about themselves. I'm just me. It's all I'll ever be. 

Point being, I'm fully aware that when you say things people like they call you a genius, and when you say things they don't like the same people will call you Satan at the drop of a hat. I have nothing in life too lose. So I have no reason to care about bigots, crybullies, etc I owe them nothing.

But I'm down to listen to anyone who isn't going to completely dismiss my concerns out of hand. And anyone who wants to talk, like you did (thanks for that too). I extend like in kind.

[Vosur]

Something about a guy in Canada running down a buncha people in a van 'cause he couldn't get laid. Or was it that murderous cretin who shot up Goleta a couple of years ago?

There seems to be a bunch of anger in that group of guys.

An ex- of mine once went trolling through incel threads on Reddit, and other incel forums, and told me about some of their shitposting, too. Some creepy goddamned stuff, an odd mix of right-wing entitlement.

The fact that I couldn't get laid in a whorehouse with a fistful of Rohypnol has nothing to do with it, I assure you.

I'm not gonna lie, some of the shit I've read on their subreddits was truly vile, but I have to say that I do feel their pain. I don't mean that I can currently relate to it since I'm in a committed relationship, but I can empathize with the feeling of true loneliness that comes with being an incel. I think a lot of the shit they say is them lashing out at a world that they think has shat on them all their lives. I also think that they have some valid points in regards to how much your life is influenced by how attractive, and in the case of men, by how tall you are. It doesn't justify their hatred of women at large, but still, I have kind of a soft spot for the broken and abandoned people of the world. I've always been like that.

[Thumpalumpacus]

I'm not gonna lie, some of the shit I've read on their subreddits was truly vile, but I have to say that I do feel their pain. I don't mean that I can currently relate to it since I'm in a committed relationship, but I can empathize with the feeling of true loneliness that comes with being an incel. I think a lot of the shit they say is them lashing out at a world that they think has shat on them all their lives. I also think that they have some valid points in regards to how much your life is influenced by how attractive, and in the case of men, by how tall you are. It doesn't justify their hatred of women at large, but still, I have kind of a soft spot for the broken and abandoned people of the world. I've always been like that.

What irks me about the incel culture as I've read of it is the helplessness they seem to espouse -- as if they are powerless to change things. I get the loneliness. I've been lonely, and to an extent I am at this time in my life. So what? I still ask a gal out if she piques my interest, still suffer pangs of rejection if she says "no" (those "nos" far outnumber the "yeses".) 

Sure, too many humans are socialized with conventional views of beauty and the value of wealth. But speaking as someone who is working class and not terribly handsome, I find that developing personal depth is something that women appreciate and respect even if they don't want to date me. And that personal depth enriches the loves I've had in my life. 

It seems to me that incels too often don't get around to asking themselves what it is that they bring to the table. There's an unspoken sense of entitlement to many of them, as if they're owed the pussy and evil women just won't give it up. And that phrasing is deliberate, because quite often they reduce women to the piece of ass they can't get -- but that ain't how people work. We don't get and stay intimate with people who see us as one-dimensional, outside of a hook-up scenario.

They hate their lives for not having intimacy, but refuse to ask themselves what it is they might change in themselves to facilitate that. They seem to expect the world to change for them, and for women to look past their ranting.

[Vera]

I'm not gonna lie, some of the shit I've read on their subreddits was truly vile, but I have to say that I do feel their pain. I don't mean that I can currently relate to it since I'm in a committed relationship, but I can empathize with the feeling of true loneliness that comes with being an incel. I think a lot of the shit they say is them lashing out at a world that they think has shat on them all their lives. I also think that they have some valid points in regards to how much your life is influenced by how attractive, and in the case of men, by how tall you are. It doesn't justify their hatred of women at large, but still, I have kind of a soft spot for the broken and abandoned people of the world. I've always been like that.

They're not broken and abandoned, the poor dears. They are entitled but inadequate jerks who think that the world - and women in particular - owes them sex. And not just any woman, no sirree, only the good-looking ones for them.

We had the perfect example on TTA. Someone who joined specifically to whine how lonely (read: unfucked and unfuckable) he was because he was too ugly. People offered A LOT of constructive advice and support, none of which was good enough for him. Then someone suggested a site, forgot the name, where plainer-looking folk would go, looking to form a connection based on something less superficial... and that "broken and abandoned" poor dear exploded all over the place, how DARE we suggest that HE settle for an uggo. (he was also VILE when talking about the few (according to him) women who'd slept with him, including describing one of them as "it was like throwing a hotdog down a highway").

"After several years in Boston, Michael still hasn't dated anyone or followed up on any of the crushes he's had: "I still kind of assume that, for whatever reason, she's gonna say no."

A woman from the hiking group asked him out, but he didn't feel any chemistry: "I just couldn't get interested. Which was, you know, frustrating."

Because he feels psychologically younger than his age, he says he'd like to date younger women whose contact with the opposite sex more closely matches his own. "I wanna feel like we're doing it in the beginning, or somewhat close to that."

But why, I wonder aloud, would a woman necessarily need to be younger than him to have a similar level of experience?

"I'd be too suspicious," he replies. "How come no guy wanted to date you?"

I can't quite believe what I'm hearing. This is Manosphere 101: the exact type of myopic, double-standard nonsense that I'd thought—or allowed myself to believe, in pursuit of a tidy redemption narrative—that Michael was working past, or had put behind him.

With guys, he goes on, he understands longtime celibacy. They're the ones who have to do the asking, put themselves out there. But women? "If you're attractive enough for me to want to date you, there's gotta be a reason someone never showed any interest in you. Or maybe someone did show interest and you didn't reciprocate. And then I would question what your values were."

But what about the girl from the hiking group? He hadn't reciprocated.

"Yeah," he says. "I'm just saying, like—I don't know. It would be just a.… You gotta have some way to—you gotta have some set of standards."

And by standards these pathetic dregs mean big boobs and a tight arse.

Genuinely lonely people - of all genders - I have all the sympathy in the world for. Hateful inadequates who want to fuck gorgeous women but, go figure, it's not happening?

[Tres Leches]

The only impression I have of incels is they're guys who rant and bitch about women, then ask "why won't any women date me?"

-Teresa

[EvieTheAvocado]

Perfect definition.

I think Pick Up Artists are often very similar to incels ... the difference is they're usually at least physically attractive even if their tactics are lame and don't work (they just sell their pick-up tactics to take money from incels .... the cringe and yuck is real with their tactics and any non-retarded woman can see right through their bullshit).

Here's a great video on the matter:

[Dr H]

Let them work where the chance for re-offense, at work, will be minimal.

Makes sense.

It does, but where would that be? The majority position of the ladies here seems to be, "not where I work" so you'd almost have to be talking about someplace that discriminates against women by not having any in the workforce.

Jobs where working around large numbers of people is the norm.

[JesseB]

Makes sense.

It does, but where would that be? The majority position of the ladies here seems to be, "not where I work" so you'd almost have to be talking about someplace that discriminates against women by not having any in the workforce.

Jobs where working around large numbers of people is the norm.

While some oil field companies do kinda discriminate against women in various ways, most these days don't. Still almost no women work on a rig, most companies don't/won't stop them and they do get hired, usually they end up getting hurt and can't keep going after 6 months to a year. It's very hard to get them to stay even when there's no discrimination at all. But some companies there still do actively discriminate. Women work at all of these companies, often in large numbers, just not on the rig itself.

Or maybe it's less discrimination and just that women are smarter than men. Fucking rig is dangerous job, could be walking around and boom 20 guys dead from poisonous gasses. Could have pressure built up on the rod and it breaks loose decapitating anyone standing up on the deck before they even know anything's gone wrong.

it takes a real dumb son of a bitch to go work on an oil rig, even with every safety precaution imaginable the likely hood of loosing fingers, toes, arms or getting killed is stupid high. There's lots of jobs out there like that.

Fuck if I know. But all things considered, you could put sex offenders there. Might seem like home to them (prison) in that the non sex offenders will beat the ever living fuck out of them and might kill them if they ever find out.

[Dr H]

But who am I kidding, those are just rhetorical questions. I wouldn't give a convicted rapist any benefit of doubt. There's a reason there's a sex offender registry - because there's a high likelihood that they'll reoffend.

Ostensibly that's the reason.

Nationwide the recidivism rate for sex crimes is about 25% (21-28%, depending on state/location).

The recidivism rate for drug crimes is 78%.
The recidivism rate for property crime (theft, burglary, auto theft, etc.) is about 67%.
For non-sex related violent assault:  60%
For murder:  50%

(See, for example:  here, and here.)

So where are the property crime, drug crime, assault, and murder registries?

[JesseB]

But who am I kidding, those are just rhetorical questions. I wouldn't give a convicted rapist any benefit of doubt. There's a reason there's a sex offender registry - because there's a high likelihood that they'll reoffend.

Ostensibly that's the reason.

Nationwide the recidivism rate for sex crimes is about 25% (21-28%, depending on state/location).

The recidivism rate for drug crimes is 78%.
The recidivism rate for property crime (theft, burglary, auto theft, etc.) is about 67%.
For non-sex related violent assault:  60%
For murder:  50%

(See, for example:  here, and here.)

So where are the property crime, drug crime, assault, and murder registries?

Yeabut lets be honest, for all crimes recidivism is a good thing, I mean from the perspective of those who design the justice system. They make money on keeping people locked up, they even brag about increasing recidivism in presentations to share holders when we're talking about private prisons.

Doesn't really counter your point. Just a little extra thing to think about.

[Tres Leches]

But who am I kidding, those are just rhetorical questions. I wouldn't give a convicted rapist any benefit of doubt. There's a reason there's a sex offender registry - because there's a high likelihood that they'll reoffend.

Ostensibly that's the reason.

Nationwide the recidivism rate for sex crimes is about 25% (21-28%, depending on state/location).

The recidivism rate for drug crimes is 78%.
The recidivism rate for property crime (theft, burglary, auto theft, etc.) is about 67%.
For non-sex related violent assault:  60%
For murder:  50%

(See, for example:  here, and here.)

So where are the property crime, drug crime, assault, and murder registries?

There's a murder registry called "Google". Every murder in my area ends up on the news and the accused's name are always publicized.

As for drug crime and assaults, I'm not sure if there's a registry. I'd have to look that up.

I'm puzzled why you're comparing property crimes to sex assaults - even listing it first on your list above. The only conclusion I'm able to reach is that women were once - and still are by some - viewed as property so it was seen as perfectly fine for men to violate their bodies. I guess you're a holdover from that era, sadly.

-Teresa

[Assassin]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

[PopeyesPappy]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

A person could even argue that crime rates decrease as incarceration rates increase.

[epronovost]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

A person could even argue that crime rates decrease as incarceration rates increase.

This correlation was proven weak when other countries have seen their crime rate drop, but their population incarcerated remain stable.

[Assassin]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

A person could even argue that crime rates decrease as incarceration rates increase.

If a prisoner gets 2 years for theft, they has plenty of time to end up back in prison. If someone gets a life sentence for murder where is the chance to get back into prison?

[JesseB]

But who am I kidding, those are just rhetorical questions. I wouldn't give a convicted rapist any benefit of doubt. There's a reason there's a sex offender registry - because there's a high likelihood that they'll reoffend.

Ostensibly that's the reason.

Nationwide the recidivism rate for sex crimes is about 25% (21-28%, depending on state/location).

The recidivism rate for drug crimes is 78%.
The recidivism rate for property crime (theft, burglary, auto theft, etc.) is about 67%.
For non-sex related violent assault:  60%
For murder:  50%

(See, for example:  here, and here.)

So where are the property crime, drug crime, assault, and murder registries?

There's a murder registry called "Google". Every murder in my area ends up on the news and the accused's name are always publicized.

As for drug crime and assaults, I'm not sure if there's a registry. I'd have to look that up.

I'm puzzled why you're comparing property crimes to sex assaults - even listing it first on your list above. The only conclusion I'm able to reach is that women were once - and still are by some - viewed as property so it was seen as perfectly fine for men to violate their bodies. I guess you're a holdover from that era, sadly.

-Teresa

Thought the point was the reason we have a sex offenders list is not because of recidivism but other factors. Pretty sure even if the recidivism rate was much lower there would still be a sex offender list. And with good reason.

Least that's how I took it.

I wouldn't trust a sex offender because some bonds when broken can never be reforged.

[JesseB]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

A person could even argue that crime rates decrease as incarceration rates increase.

This correlation was proven weak when other countries have seen their crime rate drop, but their population incarcerated remain stable.

How does that prove it weak?

What proves it weak to me is poor framing, he's setting violent crimes against incarceration as a whole. One drops the other rises, now if all crime drops and incarceration rises that shows what I think we all accept is true, we're giving out more and harsher punishments for even lower and lower thresholds of crime.

[PopeyesPappy]

To be fair, murder has a longer sentence so less probability to redo it.

A person could even argue that crime rates decrease as incarceration rates increase.

This correlation was proven weak when other countries have seen their crime rate drop, but their population incarcerated remain stable.

Yes I'm aware of that, and I didn't say it was the only even the main reason. Just that one could argue the point. Which is kind of what Assassin was alluding to. It's hard to be a repeat offender when you are still in jail. 

In the meantime... Are the crime rates dropping in other countries proportional to the US? Because I'm under the impression, perhaps mistakenly, that violent crime rates in many European countries have been on the rise for a while now. Are their prison populations stable? Are the statistics even compatible, or do the US and other countries count crimes, violent crimes in particular, differently?

[PopeyesPappy]

What proves it weak to me is poor framing, he's setting violent crimes against incarceration as a whole. One drops the other rises, now if all crime drops and incarceration rises that shows what I think we all accept is true, we're giving out more and harsher punishments for even lower and lower thresholds of crime.

Most people incarcerated in the US for violent crimes are in State prisons. The latest data available seems to show violent crimes account for the majority of the increase in state prison populations. 

[quote]From 2000 to 2008, the state prison population increased by 159,200 prisoners, and violent offenders accounted for 60% of this increase. [/quote]


https://bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/p09.pdf

[epronovost]

Yes I'm aware of that, and I didn't say it was the only even the main reason. Just that one could argue the point. Which is kind of what Assassin was alluding to. It's hard to be a repeat offender when you are still in jail. 

In the meantime... Are the crime rates dropping in other countries proportional to the US? Because I'm under the impression, perhaps mistakenly, that violent crime rates in many European countries have been on the rise for a while now. Are their prison populations stable? Are the statistics even compatible, or do the US and other countries count crimes, violent crimes in particular, differently?

Like in the US, in Europe, Canada, New Zeland and Australia, crime, especially violent crimes, have been dropping just like the US except in some localised areas like some areas of large cities which have been harmed by a variety of causes, amongst other, bad policing strategies, poverty concentration, poor infrastructures, racism, etc.