Is the left partly responsible for the radicalization of the right?

[Joshe]

10 hours ago, Elliott said:

PragerU's target demographic has expanded beyond college students to include children ages 14 to 55."

Even lower, all the way down to preschoolers. There are several states now influencing parents to use PragerU. And I think some even use it in public schools IIRC. Looked into it a while back. Sick shit. 

Edited August 19 by Joshe

[EternalForest]

This is a bit of a strawman. I'd wager that the majority of leftists don't actually think this way. It's a small vocal minority that do. And if anything, the right's biggest mistake is believing all that stuff is an attack on them when its actually meant to be a gentle push towards equality. The real issue between the right and the left is invalidating their viewpoint on a fundamental level and refusing to engage with them as a unique human who isn't sexist or racist by default. Obama said it best: 

"There will be times when you shouldn’t compromise your core values, your integrity, and you will have the responsibility to speak up in the face of injustice. But listen. Engage. If the other side has a point, learn from them. If they’re wrong, rebut them. Teach them. Beat them on the battlefield of ideas."

[Elliott]

1 hour ago, Joshe said:

Even lower, all the way down to preschoolers. There are several states now influencing parents to use PragerU. And I think some even use it in public schools IIRC. Looked into it a while back. Sick shit. 

https://www.prageru.com/state-announcements

"State Partnerships

PragerU is now an approved educational resource in multiple states across the country, including our newest state, Alaska. Our free lesson plans align with national standards while teaching American history, civics, character building, financial literacy, and more. We are excited to announce our latest state partnerships"

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

9 hours ago, Kid A said:

I'd say you reveal yourself pretty clearly when you view the concept of toxic masculinity as an attack on your own masculinity.

1 in 5 women are raped in their lifetime, and as soon as someone tries to point out the problematic aspects of us men, some find that a valid reason to support fascism...

The 1 in 5 statistic was debunked long ago and even the original researchers backtracked on it and claimed it doesn’t represent 1 in 5 women are raped.

Ironically this is an example of an actual attack on men from the same crowd pushing the toxic masculinity narrative, a misleading statistic used to spread panic and villanize men.

4 hours ago, Elliott said:

Young men don't base their lives on what politicians say, they do it based on what their role models say. Why did 42% of young men vote for Kamala then?

The garbage alpha media shouldn't be legitimized by Kamala going on.

What are you even saying? Stop making incoherent statements. 

It was already legitimized, they get hundreds of millions of views. Kamala not going on unlegitimized her for millions of peoplw who get news from them. She needed them, they didn’t need her.

3 hours ago, Leo Gura said:

Those young male audiences are already heavily biased. Kamala is not going to go on Rogan or Theo Von and convince those audiences that Trump is a monster.

This is quite a silly argument. The point of a politician campaigning is to get your message heard particularly by people on the fence or those who disagree with you. Democrat candidates regularly do interviews at Fox News. 

It’s especially ridiculous to still say this after Kamala lost. This would be an example of why her campaign was bad. Maybe I can understand it if you’re well in the lead, but they were neck to neck according to polls yet she ignored an opportunity to get hours of interrupted campaigning in the eyes of literally hundreds of millions of people, mostly independent young men the demographic she struggled with. 

I believe even her own campaign staff admitted it was a mistake.

Edited August 19 by Raze

[Elliott]

5 minutes ago, Raze said:

 

What?

It was already legitimized, they get hundreds of millions of views. Kamala not going on unlegitimized her for millions of peoplw who get news from them.

 

The island Boys get more views, should she take an interview from them. You're being ridiculous, Rogan is viewed as a garbage man, the others even lowlier, no thought, no legitimacy. Do you consider Fox news legitimate? Lmao, that's like being mad she didn't take an interview from Marjorie Taylor greene.

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

3 minutes ago, Elliott said:

The island Boys get more views, should she take an interview from them. You're being ridiculous, Rogan is viewed as a garbage man, the others even lowlier, no integrity, no legitimacy. Do you consider Fox news legitimate? Lmao

No. They don’t.

It doesn’t matter what you consider legitimate, what matters is what people watch.

Again, even her own campaign staff admitted not going on was a mistake.

I don’t know why you are defending the failed moves of a failed campaign when even her own staff isn’t.

Edited August 19 by Raze

[Raze]

Also, Kamala dismissing someone for lack of integrity is priceless. She’s openly lied multiple times such as lying about Biden effecting her school to accuse him of being racist only to endorse him later, accepted campaign bribes, and campaigned with Liz Cheney. She has no integrity. 

[Elliott]

12 minutes ago, Raze said:

The 1 in 5 statistic was debunked long ago and even the original researchers backtracked on it and claimed it doesn’t represent 1 in 5 women are raped.

Ironically this is an example of an actual attack on men, a misleading statistic used to spread panic and villanize them.

 

Source? Unironically this is an example of an attack on women.

 

https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/2015data-brief508.pdf

1in5

This is a study of 10,000 people

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

4 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Source? Unironically this is an example of an attack on women.

 

https://www.nsvrc.org/sites/default/files/2021-04/2015data-brief508.pdf

1in5

original authors admit it is misleading: https://time.com/3633903/campus-rape-1-in-5-sexual-assault-setting-record-straight/

A debunking on how it’s actually still more misleading than even they claim: https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

[Elliott]

10 minutes ago, Raze said:

No. They don’t.

"Theo Von ✔️ is a popular Instagram influencer in multiple categories. With 6.8M followers and an average engagement rate of 1.05%, Theo Von is known for"

"Jaden Hossler is the most followed member of the Island Boys, with over 10 million followers on TikTok."

10 minutes ago, Raze said:

It doesn’t matter what you consider legitimate, what matters is what people watch.

Again, even her own campaign staff admitted not going on was a mistake.

I don’t know why you are defending the failed moves of a failed campaign when even her own staff isn’t.

Because I think it's a retarded suggestion that this is alienating young men.

[Elliott]

16 minutes ago, Raze said:

original authors admit it is misleading: https://time.com/3633903/campus-rape-1-in-5-sexual-assault-setting-record-straight/

No they don't. Did you read either? They say theirs was only 2 universities and rape was 1 in 7. This was a 2007 study, mine was a 2015 nationwide study of 10,000 respondents.

Quote

A debunking on how it’s actually still more misleading than even they claim: https://time.com/3393442/cdc-rape-numbers/

Did you read this past the title? It's pathetic.

"For one, CDC survey respondents are not asked whether anyone has used physical force or threats to make them engage in a sexual activity, but “how many” people have done this (in their lifetime and in the past year). This wording removes the extra hurdle of admitting that such a violation has happened, and thus encourages more reporting. But could it also create “false positives” by nudging people toward the assumption that the default answer is affirmative—especially when preceded by a battery of other questions and statements about sexually coercive behavior?

A much bigger problem is the wording of the question measuring “incapacitated rape” (which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the CDC’s estimate of rapes that occurred in the past year). Respondents were asked about sexual acts that happened when they were “drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.” This seems to imply that “unable to consent” is only one of the variables and to include situations in which a person is intoxicated—perhaps enough to have impaired judgment—but not incapacitated as the legal definition of rape requires."

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

12 minutes ago, Elliott said:

"Theo Von ✔️ is a popular Instagram influencer in multiple categories. With 6.8M followers and an average engagement rate of 1.05%, Theo Von is known for"

"Jaden Hossler is the most followed member of the Island Boys, with over 10 million followers on TikTok."

You were discussing Rogan.

Also a tiktok account is not the same as a podcast. Theo has 7.8 million followers on Tiktok and 4.2 million on YouTube, and a similar amount of listeners on Spotify and apple podcasts.

12 minutes ago, Elliott said:

Because I think it's a retarded suggestion that this is alienating young men.

Refusing an opportunity to directly campaign to millions of men is an aspect of why they are alienated from the party. This is a very simple thing to understand and if you can’t comprehend it, it’s on you. 

Edited August 19 by Raze

[Elliott]

3 minutes ago, Raze said:

 

Refusing an opportunity to directly campaign to millions of men is an aspect of why they are alienated from the party. This is a very simple thing to understand and if you can’t comprehend it, it’s on you. 

What in the world do you think a president should specifically do for young men? An interview on 60 minutes about jobs and economy is not sufficient to prevent alienating young men?

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

9 minutes ago, Elliott said:

 

Did ypu read this? It's pathetic.

"For one, CDC survey respondents are not asked whether anyone has used physical force or threats to make them engage in a sexual activity, but “how many” people have done this (in their lifetime and in the past year). This wording removes the extra hurdle of admitting that such a violation has happened, and thus encourages more reporting. But could it also create “false positives” by nudging people toward the assumption that the default answer is affirmative—especially when preceded by a battery of other questions and statements about sexually coercive behavior?

A much bigger problem is the wording of the question measuring “incapacitated rape” (which accounted for nearly two-thirds of the CDC’s estimate of rapes that occurred in the past year). Respondents were asked about sexual acts that happened when they were “drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.” This seems to imply that “unable to consent” is only one of the variables and to include situations in which a person is intoxicated—perhaps enough to have impaired judgment—but not incapacitated as the legal definition of rape requires."

Completely reasonable point. This survey is biased to have many people who had consensual sex while drunk or high to mark themselves as being raped when they aren’t.

Edited August 19 by Raze

[Raze]

6 minutes ago, Elliott said:

What in the world do you think a president should specifically do for young men? An interview on 60 minutes about jobs and economy is not sufficient to prevent alienating young men?

The democrats had a page on who they serve and list every single demographic except for men. If you aren’t interested in telling men how you’ll help them, don’t be shocked when they don’t vote for you.

[Elliott]

9 minutes ago, Raze said:

 Completely reasonable point. This survey is biased to have many people who had consensual sex while drunk or high to mark themselves as being raped when they aren’t.

Unable to consent is rape.

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

1 minute ago, Elliott said:

Unable to consent is rape.

You can be drunk or high and still be able to consent if you aren’t incapacitated. 

[Elliott]

3 minutes ago, Raze said:

You can be drunk or high and still be able to consent if you aren’t incapacitated. 

"Respondents were asked about sexual acts that happened when they were “drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.”"

Edited August 19 by Elliott

[Raze]

1 minute ago, Elliott said:

"Respondents were asked about sexual acts that happened when they were “drunk, high, drugged, or passed out and unable to consent.”"

And the problem is the word “or”, you can read that and mark you were simply because you were drunk or high. 

[Kid A]

51 minutes ago, Raze said:

The 1 in 5 statistic was debunked long ago and even the original researchers backtracked on it and claimed it doesn’t represent 1 in 5 women are raped.

Ironically this is an example of an actual attack on men from the same crowd pushing the toxic masculinity narrative, a misleading statistic used to spread panic and villanize men.

I asked ChatGPT:

«Has the claim “1 in 5 women are raped during their lifetime” been debunked?

 

Short answer

 

No – the claim has not been fully debunked. But it requires context and an understanding of the definitions and methods behind the numbers.

 

1. Origins – CDC and NISVS (USA)

 

CDC surveys, such as the NISVS (National Intimate Partner and Sexual Violence Survey), show that between 15% and 20% of women in the U.S. have experienced completed or attempted rape during their lifetime (en.wikipedia.org).

More specifically, one report found that 19.3% of women had been victims of rape (attempted or completed) (en.wikipedia.org, reddit.com).

Other estimates from NISVS 2015 suggested 22.5% for rape (including attempts) and 43.6% for broader “sexual violence” (reddit.com).

 

So the “1 in 5” figure (20%) is not inaccurate – it falls well within the actual range, depending on definitions and whether attempts are included.

 

2. Newer numbers and updated estimates

 

According to Women on Guard, citing NISVS (2022), 26.8% of women in the U.S. have been victims of attempted or completed rape during their lifetime (womenonguard.com).

Other sources show that over half of women (53%) and almost a third of men (29%) have experienced some form of sexual violence with physical contact, while about 25% of women have experienced completed or attempted rape (charliehealth.com).

In general, recent research shows a range of 5%–25% for lifetime prevalence of sexual violence against women, depending on methodology and definitions (reddit.com).

 

3. U.S. numbers at a glance

CDC / NISVS (earlier surveys): Around 15–20% of women report attempted or completed rape (about 19%).

NISVS 2015: About 22.5% report rape (including attempts).

Women on Guard (using NISVS 2022 data): 26.8% report attempted or completed rape.

RAINN / CDC data: About 25% of women report rape, and 53% report experiencing sexual violence with physical contact.

Various reviews of studies: Estimates for lifetime sexual violence range from 5% to 25%, depending on definitions and methods.

 

Conclusion

 

The claim “1 in 5 women are raped during their lifetime” has not been debunked, but it is an oversimplification. Prevalence depends on:

 

Whether the definition includes attempted as well as completed rape, or broader categories like sexual violence.

Methodological choices, survey wording, and sampling.

 

Recent studies even suggest that the share could be higher than 20%, rather than disproven – but precise context and source matter a lot.»