How is it that certain special interest groups succeed?

Falsifying studies so as to invoke sympathy Now, before you click on the link and read what I've stated. It's not the study itself that's falsified. However, it's the ramifications, consequences, etc that become falsified such as in this example.

It says that 1 in 3 women globally are subject to abuse, which feminist activists(and the people who did the study) want to gloat is a high number. Of course, they'll likely use the "invisible" clause, to make up for the other 2/3rds of women(IE: The majority of women) who were in fact not abused.


The invisible clause: The utterly laughable proposition that, because violence is not "talked about" in public, that the number of abused *could* potentially be higher. This clause however, can neither be proven nor disproven.

In other words, the feminists cannot(though they'd like to) shove a bunch of women who previously "were silent" to the front and then claimed abuse(whether or not the abuse claimed was actually true is another story altogether).

Just the same, I cannot invoke these same "phantom people" to claim out in the open(in a way that Feminists would actually 'accept') that they in fact are not abused.

In short, the Invisible Clause is a negative and thereby cannot be proven. It relies on emotionalism. Joseph Goebbels style.

I'm not just basing my argument that special interest groups(and in this particular case, Feminism) falsify their "studies" or "findings" via the outrageous claim of the Invisible Clause.

If you read the article, you'll notice a blatant and absurd contradiction.

It says that in the U.S, only 1/5th of women are abused. We can assume this to be about the same for the Western developed nations, yet rates are much higher across the world(and obviously in particular the Middle East).

The false claim here, is the claim where violence against women is: "Violence against women is a global health problem on epidemic proportions".

Uh...false, if there's such a wide divide between Area A and Area B, you cannot call it a "global health problem". That'd be like saying that because suicides are a common occasion in Japan, that it's a common occasion in the rest of the Western World.

I'll do an Umineko and state a Red Truth:

Violence in 2nd/3rd world countries vastly shapes the scale of actual abuse

Even with this vast prevalence in uneducated and violent areas, it still only comes out to 1/3rd! That should actually speak to how little women are actually abused in the Western World.

We don't necessarily need to "do more", because doing more will make the family courts, etc more slanted than it already is. The Western World needs to move beyond "protection" and needs to established that so-called equality so spoken about in the U.S constitution. Certainly, abuses have happened throughout history.

They shouldn't have happened. The Feminist Movement took it to the extreme and alienated males from society, the consequence is a weaker work population, it actually increases violence!(Because what is a man without work? A criminal) The increased work load, etc has actually made women abuse their children!

It's obvious as to why: Stress, etc. Single parenthood for mothers is especially cruel on them. Feminism, for all the problems it claims to solve has solved none, it's actually only created more.

The last thing I wanted, was for this recent study to become another self-inflicting bullet wound on humanity, so I gave it a different interpretation.

I don't really get your point.
1/3 is not low, it is a disturbingly high number and even 1/5 is way to high. I really don't get what you are trying to say, do you think this is not a problem or do you just dislike feminists?

as for the "invisible" clause, it's painfull to see you outright denying it. It's not about having sympathy for certain groups, it's about improving the situation. I know more people that are silent about it then I know people who are not silent about it. Unless you have experienced such a situation I can say that you probably know nothing about it.

I think you need to be more to the point and clearly state your opinion instead of just rambling about feminists.

OP:


On a serious note, your post does seem to mainly try to be critical of feminists without actually saying anything. I agree that some feminists go too far, and seem to just try and find things to complain about. However abuse statistics is nothing to sneer about, this is some serious stuff.

1/3 is a lot of people if you really think about it. Out of 313 million people in the US, around half of them being women, 1/3 is a lot.

You're talking about special interest groups but talk only about feminists. You should edit your title to say feminists instead of special interest groups.

True

The reason I didn't put feminists in the title, is that I didn't want to draw attention to it. If I did draw attention to it directly, the debate about the falsification of the reality of this article wouldn't really be had.

1/3rd of women is a portion of the Human Beings in this planet. A significant portion to be sure, let's say that out of 7 billion people, 3.5 billion are females.

1/3rd of females would roughly be 1.5 Billion. There's the other 2 billion women who are having non-violent relationships.

Furthermore, the 1/3rd refers to globally, not in the U.S.(which in the article is confirmed to be far less)

In short, hyperbole has been used to create an unfair setting in the United States and if that occurs in the world than 2 billion females will have the right to falsify, to extort and the heavily biased family courts(if you can imagine them world wide) would destroy even more families.

I feel terrible for the women who are afflicted by abuse and I wouldn't want to wish it on anybody. But I watched a PBS documentary on Feminism, and what I hated was that a significant portion of these men worked late hours, spent time with their children and genuinely did their best.

The Feminist movement spat on men, saying that their efforts to care for their lovers, their wives were in effect demonizing them(as women) to slavery.

This theory, has made slaves out of children(several million of which born out of wedlock and hence don't even know their fathers) which in turn has created even more poverty.

Since Feminism first was brought up to me and I studied it objectively, I realized the difference between a well-grown woman and a feminist. A feminist, by her very nature is cynical and parasitic and in the end, the only thing such a person will have is herself.

Pitifully, they can pronounce their pity to the world in 21st century "ideals" and they will be heard. Previously, such people who took advantage of others or self-sabotaged themselves wouldn't have received as much.

You know what's a disturbingly successful interest group? The NRA.

Certain special interest groups succeed because their interests are... well... just interesting for the rest of us. People have different interests and if their group survives it means that people like what they are doing...