The Unz Review • An Alternative Media Selection
A Collection of Interesting, Important, and Controversial Perspectives Largely Excluded from the American Mainstream Media
 BlogviewIlana Mercer Archive
Bogus Stats of the Violence-Against-Women Industry
Email This Page to Someone

 Remember My Information


Bookmark Toggle AllToCAdd to LibraryRemove from Library • BShow CommentNext New CommentNext New ReplyRead More
ReplyAgree/Disagree/Etc. More... This Commenter This Thread Hide Thread Display All Comments
These buttons register your public Agreement, Disagreement, Thanks, LOL, or Troll with the selected comment. They are ONLY available to recent, frequent commenters who have saved their Name+Email using the 'Remember My Information' checkbox, and may also ONLY be used three times during any eight hour period.
Ignore Commenter Follow Commenter
Search Text Case Sensitive  Exact Words  Include Comments
List of Bookmarks

Speaking recently to Fox News’ Arthel Neville, Andrew Napolitano, also of Fox News, repeated old feminist canards about sexual assault against women being an under-reported, ever-present crime in American society.

The violence-against-women industry in North America—you know, the one-in-four-women-are-assaulted rot—is propped up by the sub-science or pseudoscience of violence-against-women statistics.

In particular, violence-against-women surveys are based on inflated numbers nobody questions; numbers the advocates bandy about and the politicians rely on when drafting policy and plumping for resources.

I’m thinking of the original 1993 StatsCan Violence Against Women survey, and its preposterous statistical offshoots, which, in turn, were spinoffs of the American violence-against-women statistical sisterhood. Canada follows America’s lead.

Anyone who’s studied research methodology at a good school (check) knows that research is shaped by the researcher’s hypothesis. Duly, the corpus of violence-against-women statistics reflects an exclusive ideological focus on female victimization. It thus consists of single sex surveys—never two sex surveys—with no input from men, to the exclusion of violence females incur from other females, or acts of violence women commit against the man in the relationship.

Developed at the height of the “war against women” moral panic, these foundational questionnaires are the product of a collaboration with advocacy groups and feminist stakeholders, and are thus fraught with problems of unrepresentative samples, lack of corroboration, a reliance on anecdotes, a use of over inclusive survey questions and, to charitably understate the problem, the broadest definition of assault.

There’s a lot that goes into skewing data.

The “statistical myths” that pervade the rape-is-rampant claims, states libertarian feminist Wendy McElroy, start with “deeply biased researchers,” who proceed invariably from a “false premise or assumption,” who then use biased and small samples whose selection, in turn, is further slanted by paying participants.

Surveys are, of course, inherently dodgy. The general pitfalls of survey methodology, such as asking leading questions, are legion.

In the realm of “never admit there is sound contradicting evidence,” this tidbit from McElroy is particularly interesting:

“The opening sentence of the [University of North Dakota] ‘study’ states that, ‘Federal data estimate that about one in five women becomes the victim of sexual assault while in college, most of which is committed by assailants known to the victim’ (National Center for Injury Prevention and Control 2012). [Yet] the 1-in-5 figure has been exhaustively debunked for many months and should be rendered unresurrectable by the Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) report (12/14) that found the actual rate of rape to be 0.61 percent per year – or 6.1 per 1,000 students.”

Shoring-up the promiscuous statistics yielded in the assorted surveys, moreover, is a reliance on prevalence figures. When claims-makers say a third of all women have been assaulted in their lifetime, they refer to the prevalence of assault over a lifetime, instead of the incidence of assault over, say, a 12-month period, that being approximately 3 percent.


Indeed, lifetime rates inflate outcomes considerably and make for good copy. One wonders, however, what existential meaning can be attached to a report that once in an entire lifetime someone a woman knew touched her knee without consent? There must be, on the other hand, some existential significance to the fact that women continue to live longer than men, that many more young men commit suicide, are more likely to be unemployed and less likely to get another job, and that men are infinitely more likely to suffer potentially life-destroying industrial accidents.

On a lighter note: One of the “intellectual” cornerstones of the violence-against-women industry is the faulty premise of a continuum of violence along which all male actions must be construed. Certainly, sexual innuendo the gender feminist sees as a form of violence against women, which is why she’ll get so exercised over the occasional caustic comment (or off-color joke) uttered by an otherwise mild-mannered man.

President Trump, of course, is no mild-mannered man. So, when he alluded to his svelte wife’s preference for salads—he was guilty of big-time sexism. (Or, something.) And you never know where a joke can go.

Ilana Mercer has been writing a weekly, paleolibertarian column since 1999. She is the author of “Into the Cannibal’s Pot: Lessons for America From Post-Apartheid South Africa (2011) & “The Trump Revolution: The Donald’s Creative Destruction Deconstructed (June, 2016). She’s on Twitter, Facebook, Gab & YouTube

• Category: Ideology • Tags: Feminism, Political Correctness 
Hide 17 CommentsLeave a Comment
Commenters to FollowEndorsed Only
Trim Comments?
  1. Rational says:


    Thanks for the article, Ma’m. You are so right.

    In America, there is big racket run by women called restraining orders. They are rubberstamped blindly and automatically by crooked Judges. All the woman has to do is to fill out a form. All the lies are already printed on the form.

    With a TRO, she can then demand money from her husband or increased alimony or higher child support to drop the bogus TRO.

    Like they say, in America, women have a new way to get rich—talk and grow rich.

    All they have to do is to utter the magic words in court “I am afraid” and the rubber stamps start working.

    See this article by a FEMALE ATTORNEY about this money machine.

  2. I always wait for your articles. I do not agree with you on many things but.I surely respect your formatting of your thoughts. You almost remind me of HITCHENS.

    • Replies: @ILANA MERCER
  3. TheOldOne says:

    Skinny Earl:

    “You almost remind me of HITCHENS.”

    is that supposed to be a compliment?

  4. anonymous[777] • Disclaimer says:

    Everybody is being beaten, assaulted and raped according to some of these people. Some years ago it was claimed women got beat up a lot on Super Bowl day, a claim later disproven but the lie was already put out in public. Being a colorful story it gained a lot of attention. People don’t want to be seen publicly questioning the fake numbers since they’ll inevitably be accused of being anti-woman and insensitive. Trump’s silly private comment was really blown up into some huge brouhaha, providing material for the so-called ‘women’s marches’. Seems as more is really the agenda here with this fake concern over the welfare of women being the Trojan Horse. Feminism has been the vehicle for pushing extreme leftism and undermining the existing societal order. Lies and scare tactics as well as intimidation are it’s tools. In the end women become victims of the fears inculcated in them as part of the campaign to manipulate them and the utopian promises made to them could never come true.

  5. anarchyst says:

    There is another aspect to women’s behavior that results much controversy and finger-pointing. There is enough blame to go around, but facing the facts quite often only results in much more consternation and ill feelings.
    The recent Michigan State University “scandal” where female gymnastics competitors were “abused” by their doctor over a period of time comes into focus.
    There are many questions that have not received proper answers, as it is not only unpopular, but inadvisable to ask them, as they go against the grain of “commonly acceptable behavior”.
    I may ruffle feathers here, but I DON’T CARE. The TRUTH must be known.
    Since this “abuse” was (supposedly) going on for years, why didn’t the women bring up their accusations years ago? Why did they keep seeing this doctor, going back for more and more “abuse”?
    The fact is, these women threw themselves at this doctor, as they considered him to be of a high(er) social status, this doctor was put into a position of having many women to choose from, as they all wanted “a piece of the action”..
    I do not absolve the doctor of responsibility to maintain a position of ethical detachment (which he should have known better and maintained), but, the temptation to “get it on” with these women who instigated the encounters were throwing themselves at him must be figured into the equation.
    The attorneys for the women were brilliant as they used the term “survivor” to describe the women, rather than the correct term “victim”. Since these women were in no danger of losing their lives, the term “survivor” was incorrect, but was used to add “gravitas” to the situation.
    Although this doctor must accept responsibility for his actions, they were partially instigated by the women themselves, who should also bear responsibility…

  6. anarchyst says:

    The problem is, women want it both ways.
    Women want the right to say no, even after enticing a man to be sexually active with her, even days, weeks, months, and years after the event.
    Her word is to be considered sacrosanct, and must be taken as truth without question, ruining many (innocent) men’s careers and even lives, as a result.
    Men are not permitted to have a defense against such accusations.
    Don’t get me wrong, I have no use for serial abusers such as Harvey Weinstein and other Hollywood, political and celebrity types; they deserve ostracization and severe punishment for their actions, BUT if women want true equality they must take responsibility for their own actions. They cannot have it both ways.
    All one has to do is look at the way Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas was treated by the mainstream media, who gave his accuser Anita Hill a pass, even though she followed him from job to job, without any mention of harassment.
    Women want the same pay for equal work–not a problem in most cases, but if a woman cannot do the job, she then asks for special treatment because she is a woman, instead of realizing that she is not cut out for such work and should seek more suitable employment.
    Men die sooner than women as they do the most hazardous work.
    If women want to be treated as equals they have to step up to the plate and TAKE FULL RESPONSIBILITY for their own actions
    Multiculturalism, diversity and especially feminism are flawed concepts that equate to the serpent in the Garden of Eden. Of course it took a female of the species to coax the male into eating of the forbidden fruit.
    Another parallel example is that of the Tower of Babel in which separate cultures and languages developed.
    At the risk of offending the female of the species, there were reasons why women did not achieve suffrage (the right to vote) among other things. I realize that there are many intelligent women who do not subscribe to externalized altruism, but there are too many who do . . . Women have a altruistic streak, which is necessary in the formation and care of their families. However, this altruism has been externalized, helped along by our enemies, caring for outsiders while neglecting the good within the family structure in–internalized altruism. This externalized altruism has become deadly which has been put into the hands of feminists. This externalized altruism made the communistic, so-called civil-rights movement a (hollow) success (Actually, the so-called civil-rights movement is falling apart), along with the country).

  7. Anonnuaa says:

    More women need to be beaten then

  8. raywood says: • Website

    Thank you for this. The research issues are many and significant. You might enjoy my linked article as an example. Unfortunately, we do not yet seem to be nearing a point at which honest researchers in gender issues begin with an interest in factuality.

  9. @Skinny Earl

    Thanks. Hitchens was a gifted writer. “An intelligent liberal,” as my dear friend Thomas Szasz, RIP, used to say.

  10. I follow the Mike Pence approach, to never allow myself to be alone with a woman who is not my wife, and even then ….

  11. a much more important fact-set:

    in ‘Murka 40,ooo-50,000 White girls and women

    are raped by Congoids each and every year.

    while there is literally no stat for White-on-Black rape.

    I’m not sure what the problem is.

    do female Congoids smell bad?

    or is it more a matter of White racism?

  12. The problem with false rape and TRO testimony is, no one beats the liar’s asses. There is no penalty for the lies. Women like to present as men, they need to get the beating like a man when they lie, cheat or steal.

  13. Anonymous [AKA "Jeffrey Asher"] says:

    Ms. Mercer,

    Thank you for your articles. You offer insights not available from other commenators.

    The sexual violence against women surveys never ask men about female seduction of unwilling men. Women may rely on the male sex drive to overcome almost all male resistance. Nor do surveys ask men about female threats to ‘stand and deliver,’ or she will tell all the girls he is sexually incompetent, gay, or accuse him of rape.

    The mainstream media almost never report on over 37,000 annual Black rapes of White women or effectively, 100 rapes per day.
    The incidence of White male rapes of Black women is zero.
    How could any social event data in USA, with 325 million population, amount to, ‘zero’?
    National Crime Victimization Survey annual data typically report: 0, 0, 4, 0, 3, 5, 0 … or statistically, zero.
    A curious researcher might ask, Why?

    Further, women claims of rape are presumed as honest. Everybody knows women always tell the truth and men always lie.
    Even liberal Wikipedia admits that false rape accusations are exposed from 1.5% (the feminist favourite) to over 90%.
    For one of the earliest recorded false accusations, see Potiphar’s wife, Genesis 39:13 – 20.

    The StatsCan report also included as, “Violence Against Women, ‘an unwelcome glance from a man across the street’.

    Jeffrey Asher, professor of “Men’s Lives”, retired

    • Replies: @737e
    , @737e
  14. One of the “intellectual” cornerstones of the violence-against-women industry is the faulty premise of a continuum of violence along which all male actions must be construed.

    This “continuum” idea is ridiculous in any case. There is a continuum of arm and hand movements that includes writing a cheque to the women’s shelter, and slapping a woman across the face. Because the latter is wrong, does that mean that all actions in the continuum are also wrong?

  15. Roy says:

    An immigrant (from Israel), I was so astonished many years back to discover that the whole topic of “the war of women” had even existed. It represents to me such a deep stupidity, a totally anachronistic a-historic world view and above all – hysteria. In most of the West, men got to vote only in the late 1800’s. The female vote came 50 years after, at the beginning of the 20th century. A historically insignificant gap. Beyond that, in the West, women have always had property rights, the right to inherit, etc. etc. with all legal differences, at least in the Anglosphere, becoming non-existent by the late 18th century. de Tocqueville gives a fabulous account of how great America was for women back in circa 1850. The life of Laura Ingalls Wilder ( demonstrates how independent and free the women of the Midwest (that cradle of deplorables) were. The whole thing is a complete made-up stupidity.

  16. 737e says:

    Misogynistic asshole. Everything you say is completely untrue.

  17. 737e says:

    Anyone who gets their information from amren is a racist fool

Current Commenter

Leave a Reply - Comments on articles more than two weeks old will be judged much more strictly on quality and tone

 Remember My InformationWhy?
 Email Replies to my Comment
Submitted comments have been licensed to The Unz Review and may be republished elsewhere at the sole discretion of the latter
Commenting Disabled While in Translation Mode
Subscribe to This Comment Thread via RSS Subscribe to All Ilana Mercer Comments via RSS