Comments on: Cameronesque Award: Family “Research” Council’s “Slippery Slope” Brochure

By: The Story So Far… » Blog Archive » The Rise Of The American Gutter

Sun, 28 Sep 2008 15:41:20 +0000

[...] carefully crafted deceptions with the material provided to it by science. Some weeks ago Jim Burroway debunked a beaut from the Family Research Council , purporting to show that statistics gathered by the CDC on domestic violence proved that same sex [...]

By: The Story So Far… » Blog Archive » Paul Cameron’s Real Gift To The Anti-Gay Industrial Complex

Tue, 22 Jul 2008 15:14:21 +0000

[...] is. You should go read Jim’s entire debunking of it to get the whole stinking rotten smell of it. But I’ll give you the executive summary here. Basically, they took the data for [...]

By: NancyP

NancyP — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 03:19:31 +0000

Another fine example of Teh Malicious Stupid.

I am sending you (JB) another fine example by email.

By: grantdale

grantdale — Tue, 22 Jul 2008 00:27:34 +0000

The other report they ref. for IPV is here. (with an update here). Look in vain to derive any figure from these, because you cannot: the data is not presented in a way that allows you to.

Often wonder if they continue to misreport that report with this other report. (We know how good FRC is at basic fact-checking…)

It shows a markedly different state of affairs to that offered by FRC.

> yes, if a woman assaults a partner… in 11.6% of cases she will have attacked another woman.

> but these represent only 1.9% of women who are attacked by a partner. 98.1% of female victims are attacked by a male partner.

> similarly, if a man is attacked by a partner… in 9.7% of cases the perpetrator will be another man.

> but only 1.5% of attacks by men are directed at another man. 98.5% of male perpetrators attack a female partner.

All this simply reflects two simple facts: men commit 86.1% of IPV, and women are 86.4% of the victims of IPV. Men commit violence and women are the victims of violence; regardless of the sex of the couples involved.

> overall, 2.9% of IPV occurs in same-sex relationships.

Meaning, violence in same-sex relationships occurs at the same rate or are lower than in opposite-sex relationships.

On a side note, always missing from the “married women are at least risk” canard is the other part of the life-time risk.

Marriages break down. The woman “safe” in her marriage soon finds herself at dramically higher risk from the ex.

As the report notes : “Divorced or separated women had higher rates of violence by intimates (16 per 1,000 persons) than women who never married (7 per 1,000) or married women (1.5 per 1,000).”

Assume 40% of marriages end in divorce. Lifetime risk from a heterosexual marriage is 7.3 per 1000.

She’d have been slightly safer if she’d never married the bastard in the first place.

By: Matthew

Matthew — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 20:43:04 +0000

For the FRC’s sake if gays are allowed to marry I promise not to push for the state to recognize my right to marry a farm for at least decade. Not just animals, but actual marrying of farm implements and land. I won’t push for my right to marry a rake. Promise.

http://thesebastards.blogspot.com/

By: Buffy

Buffy — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 19:45:33 +0000

Why do they constantly insist on violating the 9th Commandment?

By: Priya Lynn

Priya Lynn — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:56:35 +0000

Jim, I sure like the way you expose these frauds. Excellent job. It never fails to amaze me just how outrageously these people lie and distort, trying to use a study that specifically excluded monogamous gays to claim all gays are non monogamous – how despicable can you get?!

By: JTW

JTW — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:28:49 +0000

Dahl: Of course. And thank you. I’m very flattered.

By: Dahl

Dahl — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:18:21 +0000

Johno; Yes; their logic would then be to pass a law that all gays MUST get married, if they are to engage in sex.

JTW; I like the way you frame your argument, may I copy it to send via email to some friends and family members?

By: Regan DuCasse

Regan DuCasse — Mon, 21 Jul 2008 18:14:56 +0000

I informed several people representing this organization as well as the typical bloggers on TH and other conservative journals of my background with LAPD and access to criminal databases.
I can, as Jim does (you’re brilliant my man!), give the full analysis of certain demographics and when those demographics ARE broken down in proper and original context…the information will shake out that heterosexual men, heterosexual men of certain ages and heterosexual men criminally convicted of violent crimes, sex crimes, robberies or kidnapping OR domestic violence, ARE a dangerous breed indeed.

It also depends too, on information about the demographic of VICTIMS, not just perpetrators.

And wouldn’t you know…what I have to offer is dismissed or not even acknowledged, no one asks me questions or where they can find public online information on criminal databases.

Oh, NO…they firmly and wholly and unquestionably, believe EVERYTHING about homosexuals that massresistance, or FRC or TVC of the AFA and ADF has to offer.
Now…if, as these people are always claiming, that they are so imbued with The Truth….why IS their trust placed in said information and not someone full engaged intimately with the most depraved human behavior their is.

Of course too, I’m accused of not recognizing evil when I see it only for defending gay people.
Why I’d be accused of accepting terrible human behavior while working for an agency that combats and enforces it, just shows you something important.

We try to be kind here. We really do. And we don’t want to call someone bad names.
But STUPID is as STUPID does. And denying someone their empirical experience, whatever it is…when clearly you can’t, don’t or couldn’t have had the experience yourself…IS stupid.
Or at the very least, intellectual cowardice.