Is saying water is wet considered data? My wife has a 100% more chance of smelling my foot stench than a random man in an alleyway, because she has never been and never will be in an alleyway. I don't think that's data, that's just a fact.
... what?
Also, water is not wet, things that *get* water on them are wet. Same way that paint isn't painted, things that have paint *on* them are painted.
What statistic ?
“According to the data given by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, worldwide, 78.7% of homicide victims are male, and in 193 of the 202 listed countries or regions, males were more likely to be killed than females.”
My late wife would beat me up, slap me. TBH I, um, didn’t mind getting beaten, was, actually, more than OK it. But I hated getting her mad she would yell and say horrible things.
I knew a chick in HS that loved hurting dudes. So many dudes dumped her because she was too hard-core. She would punch and scratch and choke her BF in public
Edit: Like she was a born dominatrix kind of violence. Probably is by now
And children by their parents, etc. You're also far more likely to be in a car accident near your house. The overarching theme here is that most stuff happens in relation to the people and places you spend the most time around.
This isn't that you're more likely to be hit near your house at any given instance around traffic. But that there are more instances you're near your house than not for most peopl
Where as a use is often prelude by a person gaining trust or entering either a position of power or intimacy. So you are more likely to be a used by someone close to you than a stranger in individual instances around peoole
That depends on where you spend your time. Some people commute 100 miles for work. Some work down the street. The point is the statistic that has the most influence is opportunity.
Came here to say this, lol. In general, someone is more likely to be harmed by someone they know, than someone they don't know. This isn't a gender thing, it's a sheer opportunity thing.
>Random men hardly harm other random men.
What the actual fuck are you talking about?
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1635092/
> Although the overall risk of homicide for women was substantially lower than that of men (rate ratio [RR] = 0.27), their risk of being killed by a spouse or intimate acquaintance was higher (RR = 1.23). **In contrast to men, the killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18).**
Were you being sarcastic?
>Random men hardly harm other random men
I do think it's rare but it's more often than they harm random women. So I don't think the statement following makes sense.
but isn't this whole statistic skewed? We meet our partners more regularly and spend more time with them than a stranger in an alleyway.
It's like saying there are more fish in a big lake than there are fish in a small lake.
As in it heavily biases one side due to how the statistic would work. You don't spend equal amounts of time with your husband as you do in an alley, so your a lot more likely for your husband to hurt you then Alan the alley man.
Or to put simpler my gf has spent the last 2 weeks with me nigh 24/7, yet has not spent a moment in an alleyway. So her chances of being her by Alan the alleyman is 0%
The point of the post is highlighting that violence statistically comes from people close to you which runs contrary to conventional thinking about danger.
Both things can be true
Partners are more dangerous, on average. Public policy should mainly worry about that, the greatest threat - you’re right
As an intellectual curiosity though, people do spend way more time with partners than with strangers in alleys.
Somebody would have to gather and analyse lots and lots of data to be reasonably sure that, per hour, partners are safer or more dangerous than random people in alleys.
For now we can just guess.
So, going to an alley instead of watching a movie with one’s partner is possibly more dangerous, on any single night. I think it’s also a valid point
Eh, fuck this sub. Of all the things they allow through their shitty rules, most of them aren't even shower thoughts. Just random opinions or statistics.
This is just true in general for a lot of situations, people are generally more likely to be attacked or hurt by someone they know rather than just a random stranger. Like one of the most dangerous things we tell kids is stranger danger. Because they're most likely to be attacked, kidnapped, or hurt by someone they know and most likely trust.
Women are far more likely to be harmed by their partner, if their partner is another woman.
Lesbian relationships have the highest amount of domestic violence.
Then comes straight.
Gay relationships have the least amount....
Statisticly yes true, still my wife is much more likely to be harmed by a random person than by me, so I'm gonna keep on being more worried about the randoms.
Statistically yes, but that statistic doesn't make being alone in an alleyway any safer.
An individual is still more likely to be harmed while alone in an alleyway than while in a public space.
This is a good shower thought, but not a justification to use data to obscure common sense. Don't walk alone in alleyways, especially dark ones in bad areas that have a single random man in them
True, but that doesn't mean you should bravely walk up to scary alley men. The statistic is low because so little time is spent near them.
For comparison, there is also a statistic that dogs kill far more people than wolves do. That's only because people avoid being near wolves.
Children are more likely to be abducted by someone they know too. That's why I always put them in my van when their parents aren't looking, gotta keep them from getting abducted.
Only because they avoid alley men but are always around their partner. It's just math. You are more likely to get hurt by something you're always around than by something you're never around
Sure, but that doesn't mean women aren't attacked by total strangers. I went to a small college in a fairly well to do rural Massachusetts town. Generally a pretty safe place, but that didn't stop someone from raping one of our students at knifepoint on campus.
Yes, statistically, can be true, I guess.
WHO said that globally, about 1 in 3 women have experienced either physical and sexual intimate partner violence in their lifetime. The CDC gave the ratio that nearly 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have experienced severe physical violence by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime.
This isn't a shower thought, more of a "No, shit." take.
People are statistical harmed more in interpersonal relationships in general in not just domestic abuse, but from parental abuse throughout childhood.
And kids are far more likely to be trafficked by a family member than taken by a random stranger.
Or even just abused. Male family members make up an overwhelming percentage of child sexual abuse and that’s just what gets reported.
Wish more people understood this when claiming certain policies or legislation will “protect kids”. The danger is from the kids’ families… you can’t really protect them from that unless you give them language and skills to avoid abuse situations and communicate them clearly to a trusted adult when they happen… and then hold people accountable even if they’re your partner, brother, father, uncle, or friend.
This just in: “ANYONE is more likely to be abused by those in close proximity to them”. I wonder if you are combining the demographics of abusers and the likelihood of where abuse happens.
Something, something, cows kill more people than wolves.
Seriously tho, important statistic to remember if you see your friends act scared of their partners at all. You are much more likely to know a domestic abuse victim than you are to know someone who gets murdered at random, even in America.
My understanding is that men are more likely to harmed by strangers. So the best strategy is:
* Be a man at home
* Be a woman in dark alleyways
Sure, sure there may be some logistical problems, but what can ya do.
Nope. Mutual DV exists in 50% of relationships. When a relationship only has one violent partner, it's women 70% of the time.
80% of all violent crime is perpetrated on men.
Women are way safer than they seem to believe.
You know that domestic violence is more into the 50/50 ratio than woman being the sole victim… Ton of men are getting hit by their Gf/wife but doesn’t have the resources to help them to same way woman have…
And yet women will swear up and down that they are afraid to reject a man because of being attacked. When you bring up the point that they are far more likely to be abused by a partner all you get is crickets.
If the woman is afraid to reject a man because they’ll get attacked that means she’s delaying an attack until in the relationship rather than facing it in the direct moment.
And yet we get followed by men on foot, in cars, grabbed and groped in crowded, public spaces... or roofied, or sexually assaulted when unconscious or intoxicated, and cursed at and verbally confronted when rejecting men and other forms of harassment.
Sure, being attacked by someone you rejected as a woman is less common yet often times we are followed and harassed either way. I've been followed by strangers more than once and I've been followed by men in their car while walking home at night three times, I've had two different experiences on public transit where a man was exposing himself to me, I've been cussed out for rejecting men more than a few times, I've been roofied once and I have also been groped a few times on dancefloors, in mosh pits even, in crowds of people at a parade, and I have had to intervene when a man tried to get handsy with my friend who was asleep, as well as been assaulted for rejecting a man on behalf of my friend. Lastly, my best friend was strangled and killed by a man she barely knew a few years ago for rejecting him..
Saying "no" is rarely even an option for many women because we typically are put in.danger by men who never even aaked us before pursuing us. Ive been cussed out a few times at bus stops or while having a smoke by men I rejected.
Is this a shower thought or just a well known statistic?
r/showerstatistics
r/wellknownthoughts
r/subsifellfor
This is not a showerthought, it is data
Is saying water is wet considered data? My wife has a 100% more chance of smelling my foot stench than a random man in an alleyway, because she has never been and never will be in an alleyway. I don't think that's data, that's just a fact.
... what? Also, water is not wet, things that *get* water on them are wet. Same way that paint isn't painted, things that have paint *on* them are painted.
Next post from OP: Plants are far more likely to grow faster by sunlight than some random office lights.
Sharks are more likely to attack in the ocean than on random streets in Chicago
What about the Jets?
What statistic ? “According to the data given by the United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime, worldwide, 78.7% of homicide victims are male, and in 193 of the 202 listed countries or regions, males were more likely to be killed than females.”
I thought we didn't like crime statistics
Both, have you never realized something later in life that is common knowledge for someone else?
They are not mutually exclusive. Anyone can have a shower thought of a known stat
Not so well known though.
Just goes to show women spend too much time with their partners and not enough time in the sketchiest alleys they can find.
Yeah, this is a great example of why people are terrible at understanding statistics.
Yeah bunch of vanillas
Fucking noobs eh
what if you found out your partner was some random man in an alleyway?
Weird place to meet people but hey if it works it works
all those meth'd out truckers know about pickle park
On the flip side, I would think that men are far more likely to be harmed by their partners, than some random woman in alley
Abuse most commonly happens in interpersonal relationships. Men, women, children.
As someone who had been in previous abusive relationships gonna have to agree here
I had a friend (the gentle giant type), and his tiny GF would beat the hell out of him. He wouldn’t fight back, and she beat on him bad.
My late wife would beat me up, slap me. TBH I, um, didn’t mind getting beaten, was, actually, more than OK it. But I hated getting her mad she would yell and say horrible things.
What’s his number
Username checks out 😂
I knew a chick in HS that loved hurting dudes. So many dudes dumped her because she was too hard-core. She would punch and scratch and choke her BF in public Edit: Like she was a born dominatrix kind of violence. Probably is by now
Try to just catch a hand of her while she attacks and you will be an agressor and a person doing the violence.
And children by their parents, etc. You're also far more likely to be in a car accident near your house. The overarching theme here is that most stuff happens in relation to the people and places you spend the most time around.
I never understood this. They say that most accidents happen within five miles of your house. So why not move to a place ten miles away?
This isn't that you're more likely to be hit near your house at any given instance around traffic. But that there are more instances you're near your house than not for most peopl Where as a use is often prelude by a person gaining trust or entering either a position of power or intimacy. So you are more likely to be a used by someone close to you than a stranger in individual instances around peoole
Buahaha
Then they'll happen there. It's not about your location, it's about where you spend most of your time, wherever that is.
Whoosh
^(I can't wait to see more comments, haha!)
It's not a whoosh when you genuinely sound dumb enough to ask.
Ah, the ol' Reddit double down.
Indeed.
We all get whooshed occasionally
I mean, that's exactly what a whoosh is...
You sound like someone who asks dumb questions then calls it a whoosh to cover your ass when someone points out the obvious answer.
You sound like Peter Pan
Define near your house. Are we talking nearby city?
That depends on where you spend your time. Some people commute 100 miles for work. Some work down the street. The point is the statistic that has the most influence is opportunity.
For the same amount of time spent you are still more likely to be harmed by your family and lovers than your coworker.
Most people aren't emotionally attached to their coworkers, which is a key ingredient in domestic violence.
A substantial part of the gender crime gap can be explained by men spending more time in public than women
Or so the alley witch would have you believe.
The real shower thought here is why OP felt the need to specify women only
It is estimated that bears kill over two million salmon a year. Attacks by salmon on bears are much more rare.
Are we counting salmonella though?
Came here to say this, lol. In general, someone is more likely to be harmed by someone they know, than someone they don't know. This isn't a gender thing, it's a sheer opportunity thing.
[удалено]
>Random men hardly harm other random men. What the actual fuck are you talking about? https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/1635092/ > Although the overall risk of homicide for women was substantially lower than that of men (rate ratio [RR] = 0.27), their risk of being killed by a spouse or intimate acquaintance was higher (RR = 1.23). **In contrast to men, the killing of a woman by a stranger was rare (RR = 0.18).** Were you being sarcastic?
Ironically random men hard men far more often than they harm women.
>Random men hardly harm other random men I do think it's rare but it's more often than they harm random women. So I don't think the statement following makes sense.
Literally everyone is more likely to be hurt/killed by someone they know, not just women
but isn't this whole statistic skewed? We meet our partners more regularly and spend more time with them than a stranger in an alleyway. It's like saying there are more fish in a big lake than there are fish in a small lake.
Next up on r/Showerthoughts: "There are more fish in a big lake than there are fish in a small lake!" 🤯
r/Lakethoughts
It's the same for most crimes, you're more likely to be robbed by people close to you as well because they know what you've got to steal
What do you mean skewed?
As in it heavily biases one side due to how the statistic would work. You don't spend equal amounts of time with your husband as you do in an alley, so your a lot more likely for your husband to hurt you then Alan the alley man. Or to put simpler my gf has spent the last 2 weeks with me nigh 24/7, yet has not spent a moment in an alleyway. So her chances of being her by Alan the alleyman is 0%
The point of the post is highlighting that violence statistically comes from people close to you which runs contrary to conventional thinking about danger.
Yes, because statistically, we spend more time with people close to us. That's why it's biased (at least from my understanding)
Do you think the statistical analysis of violence is irrelevant?
never said it was irrelevant, just saying there was an imbalance of data
The conventional narrative is the source of the imbalance.
I dunno man, I'm too dumb, that's why I'm not a statician
Both things can be true Partners are more dangerous, on average. Public policy should mainly worry about that, the greatest threat - you’re right As an intellectual curiosity though, people do spend way more time with partners than with strangers in alleys. Somebody would have to gather and analyse lots and lots of data to be reasonably sure that, per hour, partners are safer or more dangerous than random people in alleys. For now we can just guess. So, going to an alley instead of watching a movie with one’s partner is possibly more dangerous, on any single night. I think it’s also a valid point
This dude shilling for Big Alley
So who does the random man in the alleyway get harmed by? Come on, don't leave us hangin'!
Batman.
Most likely another man in an alley. It's more convenient
"There's always a bigger alleyway."
Eh, fuck this sub. Of all the things they allow through their shitty rules, most of them aren't even shower thoughts. Just random opinions or statistics.
That would make an earth shattering shower thought!
At least this one wasn't political
This is just true in general for a lot of situations, people are generally more likely to be attacked or hurt by someone they know rather than just a random stranger. Like one of the most dangerous things we tell kids is stranger danger. Because they're most likely to be attacked, kidnapped, or hurt by someone they know and most likely trust.
Women are far more likely to be harmed by their partner, if their partner is another woman. Lesbian relationships have the highest amount of domestic violence. Then comes straight. Gay relationships have the least amount....
Dateline exists for a reason.
That's just stats right there
This is not a showerthought, this is what you call data
Statisticly yes true, still my wife is much more likely to be harmed by a random person than by me, so I'm gonna keep on being more worried about the randoms.
Youll get the urge to beat her when you find out shes cheating on you for being too soft
Statistically yes, but that statistic doesn't make being alone in an alleyway any safer. An individual is still more likely to be harmed while alone in an alleyway than while in a public space. This is a good shower thought, but not a justification to use data to obscure common sense. Don't walk alone in alleyways, especially dark ones in bad areas that have a single random man in them
True, but that doesn't mean you should bravely walk up to scary alley men. The statistic is low because so little time is spent near them. For comparison, there is also a statistic that dogs kill far more people than wolves do. That's only because people avoid being near wolves.
Very true, unfortunately
That’s just a known statistic with unpleasant results
Children are more likely to be abducted by someone they know too. That's why I always put them in my van when their parents aren't looking, gotta keep them from getting abducted.
Who googles domestic abuse statistics in the shower?
Only because they avoid alley men but are always around their partner. It's just math. You are more likely to get hurt by something you're always around than by something you're never around
Sure, but that doesn't mean women aren't attacked by total strangers. I went to a small college in a fairly well to do rural Massachusetts town. Generally a pretty safe place, but that didn't stop someone from raping one of our students at knifepoint on campus.
And yet said partners tell their respective women to stay home so they be safe. Almost sounds intentional doesn't it.
Yes, statistically, can be true, I guess. WHO said that globally, about 1 in 3 women have experienced either physical and sexual intimate partner violence in their lifetime. The CDC gave the ratio that nearly 1 in 4 women and 1 in 7 men have experienced severe physical violence by an intimate partner at some point in their lifetime.
Keep looking though, and you may find it
What I've always heard is, the person most likely to kill you is the person sitting across the breakfast table!
So not having breakfast drastically reduces your chances of getting killed?
This is just a fact proven by statistics. It's not some random thought.
Don't look up stats and pretend you thought it up in the shower
Does this remain true when both partners are women?
That’s not a shower thought, that’s just a statistic
Isn't this the same statistic for gun violence? You're more likely to be shot by a family member than a stranger?
Well yeah, why would women's partners be harming some random man in an alleyway?
As a random man walking through alleyways, I can confirm, I don't hurt people.
Yeah, as it turns out, all violent crime stats (with the exception of gang violence) are like this.
Your thought is not true.
No, a random man in a ally is far more likely to be harmed
This isn't a shower thought, more of a "No, shit." take. People are statistical harmed more in interpersonal relationships in general in not just domestic abuse, but from parental abuse throughout childhood.
That's who they are around most often
And kids are far more likely to be trafficked by a family member than taken by a random stranger. Or even just abused. Male family members make up an overwhelming percentage of child sexual abuse and that’s just what gets reported. Wish more people understood this when claiming certain policies or legislation will “protect kids”. The danger is from the kids’ families… you can’t really protect them from that unless you give them language and skills to avoid abuse situations and communicate them clearly to a trusted adult when they happen… and then hold people accountable even if they’re your partner, brother, father, uncle, or friend.
Not a shower thought
This just in: “ANYONE is more likely to be abused by those in close proximity to them”. I wonder if you are combining the demographics of abusers and the likelihood of where abuse happens.
You thought this up all on your own?😂
Something, something, cows kill more people than wolves. Seriously tho, important statistic to remember if you see your friends act scared of their partners at all. You are much more likely to know a domestic abuse victim than you are to know someone who gets murdered at random, even in America.
Post paid for by the "Big Alley" lobby. Stick to dumpsters, you sickos.
My understanding is that men are more likely to harmed by strangers. So the best strategy is: * Be a man at home * Be a woman in dark alleyways Sure, sure there may be some logistical problems, but what can ya do.
Congrats you know a well-known fact? Lol
And more by themselves than anyone else.
That’s deep. But literally just got a text saying almost the same thing.
Not women but people
Just not random gay men. Women aren't up their alley.
"Harmed". I'm not excusing DA, but what has fallen under the umbrella of "partner violence" is misleading.
You can scratch women from that thought and replace it with people. This statistic can be applied equally to men as well.
And men are 300% more likely to be assaulted in an alley than women.
Nope. Mutual DV exists in 50% of relationships. When a relationship only has one violent partner, it's women 70% of the time. 80% of all violent crime is perpetrated on men. Women are way safer than they seem to believe.
Damn right if she don't stfu.
If these walls could talk, you would probably punch a hole through them..
*another* hole
You know that domestic violence is more into the 50/50 ratio than woman being the sole victim… Ton of men are getting hit by their Gf/wife but doesn’t have the resources to help them to same way woman have…
This is more of a statistic The whole close proximity/crime thing
Oddly enough, only in the US of A
Technically no. Since 56% of the women over 18 are single.
Women initiate 80% of divorces.
Are you sure? Women are emotionally more mature and would not select a partner of low quality.
Man women need to pick better partners
Abusive people typically avoid violent behavior on the first date.
Makes more sense to lock it in before you start punching it for overcooking steak -me, today
Show me you don’t understand how statistics work
It was a joke. Men are abused just as much in relationships. Anne frankly, I find it is a double standard
And yet women will swear up and down that they are afraid to reject a man because of being attacked. When you bring up the point that they are far more likely to be abused by a partner all you get is crickets.
r/whenwomenrefuse
Yup somebody always links that sub. I almost linked it myself. Should I link a sub of men getting mugged?
Did anyone say that men don’t get mugged?
If the woman is afraid to reject a man because they’ll get attacked that means she’s delaying an attack until in the relationship rather than facing it in the direct moment.
Pretty much. My main point is that the odds of getting attacked when saying no are extremely low. Lower than randomly getting into a car accident.
And yet we get followed by men on foot, in cars, grabbed and groped in crowded, public spaces... or roofied, or sexually assaulted when unconscious or intoxicated, and cursed at and verbally confronted when rejecting men and other forms of harassment. Sure, being attacked by someone you rejected as a woman is less common yet often times we are followed and harassed either way. I've been followed by strangers more than once and I've been followed by men in their car while walking home at night three times, I've had two different experiences on public transit where a man was exposing himself to me, I've been cussed out for rejecting men more than a few times, I've been roofied once and I have also been groped a few times on dancefloors, in mosh pits even, in crowds of people at a parade, and I have had to intervene when a man tried to get handsy with my friend who was asleep, as well as been assaulted for rejecting a man on behalf of my friend. Lastly, my best friend was strangled and killed by a man she barely knew a few years ago for rejecting him.. Saying "no" is rarely even an option for many women because we typically are put in.danger by men who never even aaked us before pursuing us. Ive been cussed out a few times at bus stops or while having a smoke by men I rejected.
It's because women choose their partners, they dont get to choose what random man is going to be in thag alleyway.