Unless you think marital rape was a major problem amongst American GIs in France from 1944-1945, it’s not really a salient point.
Bravo, you’ve found the difference!
Yes, actually. It has its problems, but the estimation of the number of rapes performed by GIs in France is not in dispute here;
The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.
“We don’t know and we can’t know because evidence doesn’t exist” / "Numbers are meaningless” and “You should’ve used contemporary numbers instead!” / your argument would doubtlessly be “But contemporary definitions of rape don’t include acts we include in modern definitions of rape, therefore, it’s incomparable and my preconception remains untarnished by evidence.”
Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between “use comparable metrics FFS” and “numbers are useless”.
If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up. As we are concerned with actual rapes committed, and not arbitrarily excluding rapes because of legal definitions, it makes no sense to try to claim the lack of marital rape recognized by contemporary law to be at all relevant.
The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.
Yet you aren’t disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape. Yet in your dispute of the definitions, you manage to define literally nothing that would create substantial discontinuity between the statistics being compared.
Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between “use comparable metrics FFS” and “numbers are useless”.
Comparable metrics like “Rape per capita” and “rape per capita”.
But sure, go back to claiming that the numbers are wrong, and that I’ve inflated them fivefold, and then backtrack and completely reverse your argument into a dismissal of the applicability of those numbers once it turns out that the numbers are valid and are against your argument, not in support of it.
If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up.
Yet you aren’t disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape.
Comparable metrics like “Rape per capita” and “rape per capita”.
Since 1944 rape was legally redefined and expanded 5-6 times in both France and England (i prefer not to get into the details…), some of the laws and significant societal changes, actual policing standards changed even after this book was written (2001) and published (2007). Even the non-conflict related stats have a disclaimer about cultural and legal differences limiting direct comparison, but most importantly the UN considers conflict-related sexual violence as its own distinct category (again you’ve compared conflict vs non-conflict stats).
But at this point I’ll give in to your logic and conclude this discussion with this graph which clearly indicates “that by those numbers, it would be much safer to be a woman with an English man in 2007, than to be a woman with an English man in 2022.”
Bravo, you’ve found the difference!
The comparability of arbitrarily picked numbers is in dispute which depends on the methodology.
Fair, my time is better spent on people understanding the difference between “use comparable metrics FFS” and “numbers are useless”.
If marital rape was not an issue amongst GIs, it would not have driven their rate of rapes up. As we are concerned with actual rapes committed, and not arbitrarily excluding rapes because of legal definitions, it makes no sense to try to claim the lack of marital rape recognized by contemporary law to be at all relevant.
Yet you aren’t disputing the methodology, but the definitions of rape. Yet in your dispute of the definitions, you manage to define literally nothing that would create substantial discontinuity between the statistics being compared.
Comparable metrics like “Rape per capita” and “rape per capita”.
But sure, go back to claiming that the numbers are wrong, and that I’ve inflated them fivefold, and then backtrack and completely reverse your argument into a dismissal of the applicability of those numbers once it turns out that the numbers are valid and are against your argument, not in support of it.
Pathetic.
Since 1944 rape was legally redefined and expanded 5-6 times in both France and England (i prefer not to get into the details…), some of the laws and significant societal changes, actual policing standards changed even after this book was written (2001) and published (2007). Even the non-conflict related stats have a disclaimer about cultural and legal differences limiting direct comparison, but most importantly the UN considers conflict-related sexual violence as its own distinct category (again you’ve compared conflict vs non-conflict stats).
But at this point I’ll give in to your logic and conclude this discussion with this graph which clearly indicates “that by those numbers, it would be much safer to be a woman with an English man in 2007, than to be a woman with an English man in 2022.”
https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/crimeandjustice/bulletins/sexualoffencesinenglandandwalesoverview/march2022