6 ms·

While that story might be intimidating I can't help but think it's statistical nonsense and discredits the professors integrity. Starting from the assumption t

by ascar 5y ago

While that story might be intimidating I can't help but think it's statistical nonsense and discredits the professors integrity. Starting from the assumption that general population numbers apply to a group of law students (I assume that he doesn't have statistics about rape among law students) on to the assumption that there is a 1 to 1 relationship between rape victims and rapists. I would assume there to be more victims than offenders. Just seems a rather weird move to tell your first year students a significant number of their fellows and friends are either victims or rapists just to make a point about unsolved rape.

sandworm101 5y ago
>> I would assume there to be more victims than offenders. Why? Women who have been abused are often abused by more than one person. >>just to make a point about unsolved rape. She was making multiple points, several of which had nothing to do with rape. It was about criminality. Why we punish crimes the way we do. The strain on police/judicial resources. Diversionary programs. The prevalence of plea bargaining. and and and. A first year law lecture is a very nuanced thing.
- thatcat 5y ago
  What's her point other than that our system is ineffective and incredibly wasteful?
chefandy 5y ago
It sounds like the professor made it clear she was speaking in terms of population averages. So unless you can find empirical evidence that those statistics don't apply to that slice of the population, then there's absolutely no problem with what she said. She didn't say "15 of the men in this class are rapists." Law students aren't learning to be statisticians, epidemiologists, or policy wonks. Emotionally moving people to act upon a collection of documented facts— be it in trial or a contract negotiation— requires persuasive speaking and strategy. She made the breadth and consequences of rape palpable to her students not only by giving it a face, but giving it their faces. Since this poster, years later, immediately recalled that story when prompted, I reckon it was thoroughly compelling.
- fiestaman 5y ago
  The odds that a group of 100 law students would perfectly represent the overall population are astronomical. You cannot extend population-level averages to a group of people without first proving that group is representative of the population.
  - wolverine876 5y ago
    Perhaps everyone in the room knew that. Perhaps it was even said. Were you there?
  - chefandy 5y ago
    You essentially restated the criticism I responded to.

by ascar 5y ago

sandworm101 5y ago

>> I would assume there to be more victims than offenders. Why? Women who have been abused are often abused by more than one person. >>just to make a point about unsolved rape. She was making multiple points, several of which had nothing to do with rape. It was about criminality. Why we punish crimes the way we do. The strain on police/judicial resources. Diversionary programs. The prevalence of plea bargaining. and and and. A first year law lecture is a very nuanced thing.

thatcat 5y ago
What's her point other than that our system is ineffective and incredibly wasteful?

chefandy 5y ago

It sounds like the professor made it clear she was speaking in terms of population averages. So unless you can find empirical evidence that those statistics don't apply to that slice of the population, then there's absolutely no problem with what she said. She didn't say "15 of the men in this class are rapists." Law students aren't learning to be statisticians, epidemiologists, or policy wonks. Emotionally moving people to act upon a collection of documented facts— be it in trial or a contract negotiation— requires persuasive speaking and strategy. She made the breadth and consequences of rape palpable to her students not only by giving it a face, but giving it their faces. Since this poster, years later, immediately recalled that story when prompted, I reckon it was thoroughly compelling.

fiestaman 5y ago
The odds that a group of 100 law students would perfectly represent the overall population are astronomical. You cannot extend population-level averages to a group of people without first proving that group is representative of the population.
- wolverine876 5y ago
  Perhaps everyone in the room knew that. Perhaps it was even said. Were you there?
- chefandy 5y ago
  You essentially restated the criticism I responded to.