Carpe Diem

Another example of a misleading, incomplete representation of facts about an important women’s issue

womenwomen3The top chart above compares the number of American war casualties in Afghanistan (2,002) and Iraq (4,486), the number of Americans killed by terror attacks (3,073), and the greater number of American women killed by intimate partners between 2001 and 2012 (11,766). The chart apparently originated on Facebook and here on this blog in 2012, and has been re-posted now hundreds of times on various blogs, websites, Twitter and Facebook over the last few years. Here are some examples of the comments that the shocking graphic has generated:

1. Christine Burns: “Powerful graphic, putting violence against women in US society into stark context compared with wars and terror.” (Source.)

2. Mansur Gidfar: “Don’t believe in the War On Women? Would a body count change your mind? We send troops to Afghanistan but ignore this?” (Source.)

3. E.J. Graff: “This chart just astonished me. Take a second to compare (all) American deaths in combat with women’s deaths at the hands of men who putatively loved them. Now, which war, again, is being funded with billions of dollars and covered every day with high-profile news coverage and media punditry?” (Source.)

4. Ann Jones: “The greater number of women killed here at home is a measure of the scope and the furious intensity of the war against women, a war that threatens to continue long after the misconceived war on terror is history.” (Source.)

5. Ted McLaughlin: “The Republican Party didn’t have any problem funding both of the unnecessary wars (Iraq and Afghanistan). But when it comes to spending far less money to save the lives of thousands of American women, the congressional Republicans aren’t on board. They would rather play politics with the issue than save women’s lives.” (Source.)

6. Amanda Fox: “The violence statistics are this bad.” (Source.)

You get the idea… Things are so bad for women in America, that they are at greater risk of getting killed by a boyfriend or husband than if they were in combat in Afghanistan or Iraq…. or something like that. But as is often the case with the “conspiracy feminists,” the propaganda is more important than the truth, and this is a classic example of the statistical fraud that seems to be so common for women’s issues like the 23% gender pay gap for doing the same work, the campus sexual assault epidemic, etc.

The bottom chart above shows a slightly revised comparison over a slightly different time period for the number of deaths from war and terror attacks since 2001 to: a) the number of female homicides from intimate partners (boyfriends, husbands and ex-spouses) AND b) the number of male homicides from intimate partners (girlfriends, wives and ex-spouses), which did not appear in the top graphic. Without that additional variable (male homicides from intimate partners), the number of female homicides has no context and is rather meaningless, no?

The homicide data in the bottom chart are based on “cause of death” data from the Center for Disease Control for the years 1999 to 2010 (most recent year available) for men and women ages 16 and older. During that 12-year period, 40,839 women and 156,893 men were murdered (more than 1,000 every month!), which is a male-female ratio of almost 4-to-1 for all murders. According to the Department of Justice (Table 6 in this report), female murder victims (41.5%) were almost six times more likely than men (7.1%) to be killed by an intimate partner between 1980-2006. Applying those percentages to the total number of murders for each gender during the 1999-2010 period would mean that 16,948 American women and 11,139 American men were killed by intimate partners between 1999 and 2010. In both cases, the homicides by intimate partners for men and women were greater than the combined number of deaths from war and terror attacks since 2001 (9,881), and the “furious intensity of the war against women” in “stark contrast to wars and terror” argument starts to collapse.

Further, if we consider the number of homicides between 1999 and 2010 from the other three offender categories besides intimates – strangers, acquaintances, and other family members – there were more than six males (145,754) murdered for every female (23,891) during that 12-year period. When those figures appear on the chart below, the number of men murdered by strangers, acquaintances and other family members besides intimate partners is so large that it makes the deaths by war and terror attacks appear rather inconsequential in comparison. If the 16,948 female homicides from intimate partners in the bottom chart (or the 11,766 homicides in the top chart above) are evidence of a “War on Women,” doesn’t the six-fold higher number of male homicides (145,754) warrant some concern about a “War on Men” in the United States? For all male homicides, the number of American men murdered at home every six months (about 6,500) is roughly equivalent to the combined death count in Iraq and Afghanistan over the last decade of 6,800! 

deathsBottom Line: The reality is that while women are at a 52% greater risk than men for being the victim of homicide by an intimate partner, men are at a four-time greater risk than women of being murdered overall, and are six-times more likely than women to be murdered by somebody besides an intimate partner. The “War on Women” graphic above undermines the seriousness of domestic violence and compromises the credibility of feminists by presenting incomplete and misleading data. Unfortunately, the “War on Women” rhetoric often becomes a “War on the Truth” by distorting and misrepresenting factual data, and this is a classic example.

I think we need to call on the “Factual Feminist” for some help exposing this misrepresentation of the factual data about the “War on Women.”

35 thoughts on “Another example of a misleading, incomplete representation of facts about an important women’s issue

  1. Since politicians can buy women’s votes endlessly even with memes totally bereft of facts, this will never go away.

    Rather, it demonstrates why a democracy, over time, devolves into a ‘feminist’ police state.

    No election in America, from now on, will *not* be dominated by some ‘women’s issue’ or the other, as that is the bread and butter of any lefty electoral strategy. In fact, this is crowding out just about every other issue.

  2. Great work Mark, and a most interesting read.
    What a shame people like you have to devote so much time and energy to deconstructing lies and misrepresentations in the hope of bringing about a meeting of the minds via informed debate … instead of being able to by-pass the BS and just go straight to working together to address important social issues that affect men and women.

  3. The charts are examples of PC-correct hysteria.

    Women and rape, the threat of terrorism, that threat of radiation—all widely exaggerated for some political and financial end.

    How about this number: Since 9/11, more than 180,000 Americans have been murdered by terrorists—they were called drunk drivers. True, too.

    But oh, the rapes, the terrorists, the radiation!!!

  4. Basically, women are so safe that you have to invent ways to make them victims. Note they also cleverly fail to break down war deaths by sex.

  5. Democrats are essentially asserting that women are too stupid to do correctly process statistics in their pretty little heads.

    • And the federal government has convinced the American public that some Islamic hillbillies are a national security threat requiring literally trillions of dollars in outlays…

      • Yes, those Islamic hillbillies would never be able to topple buildings in New York, attack military headquarters in Washington, blow up train stations in Madrid and buses in London, or provide spiritual guidance to Muslims who shoot up US Army bases, murder Army recruiters in Arkansas, or set off bombs at the Boston marathon.

  6. I have a snarky comment:

    If the war on women means harming women
    The war on terror means harming terrorists
    The war on drugs means harming drug users

    Does that mean the war on poverty means harming poor people?

    • They’re harmed but they’re also getting free stuff, and getting paid to produce likely future burdens on society.

      Law abiding taxpayers are getting nothing but harm.

  7. Most known murderers are African American males and most of their victims are African American males.

    So, where is the narrative that the biggest war in the U.S. is amongst African Americans males?

    I don’t think recognizing this has the political payoff for votes that the “War on Women” has for the leftists.

    • I’d like to see a chart that broke out the stats by race. I guess that would be racist, though. I believe at least some of the FBI Uniform Crime Reports do show numbers by race.

  8. Excellent analysis!

    Furthermore, the info-graphic is very misleading by cherry-picking simple absolute numbers. They should have presented mortality rates to get a true apples to apples comparison.

    I bet if they took an unbiased approach, they will see that the mortality rate of women killed by intimate partners will be miniscule compares to the mortality rate in the battlefield.

    • Do you not know how to read???? Dr. Perry was saying that the comparing deaths of women and deaths in the battlefield is a ridiculous comparison. I was echoing the same sentiment.

  9. Almost every issue in the limelight today suffers from data misrepresentation and half-truths. I personally believe this is a result of massive amounts of individuals possessing massive amounts of information at the click of a button. When you have that much information, it’s a lot easier to read a headline and make assumptions than it is to be diligent. I think as a society, we are still adapting to the unprecedented changes in our technology. People assuming they know everything is a predictable result of humanity having the whole of our history available for free.

    • As Dogbert once said, knowledge growth is exponential, but one’s ability to comprehend knowledge is unchanged. It’s like aiming a fire-hose at a teacup

  10. You’re quoting Dr. Perry saying that men have a higher chance of being murdered than women.

    “[M]en are at a four-time greater risk than women of being murdered overall”

    “[M]en..are six-times more likely than women to be murdered by somebody besides an intimate partner.”

    Seriously, do you know how to read?

    • “the fact men are murderous towards each other”

      Nobody said that. I didn’t say that. Dr. Perry didn’t say that.

      You said that. You made it up. Stop creating strawman arguments.

  11. “War” implies two sides—i.e., men killing women, the example the original chart makes. Or your counter-example of women killing men.

    But then you throw in the bar for how many men are murdered by people other than their partners.

    Who do you think is doing all that murdering?

    According to Table 1 in the report you’re citing, 89.5% of all murders are committed by men, even though they’re a minority! So, you’re right, the original chart is misleading. Men haven’t just declared war on women; they’ve declared war on everyone.

    It’s also pretty fascinating that despite how many more men are murdered overall, men are still the victims of domestic violence only 2/3 as often as women. Ah, statistics.

    By the way, Table 6 says that the percentages are for the 63.1% of homicides for which a relationship was known, not for all of them. That might be why your count of women murdered by partners is so different from the original chart’s. Might be a good idea to read the entire chart you’re quoting before you use it to accuse others of statistical fraud.

    • “It’s also pretty fascinating that despite how many more men are murdered overall, men are still the victims of domestic violence only 2/3 as often as women. Ah, statistics.”

      So domestic violence is a more important kind of violence?

      • It’s a different kind of violence. If you want to claim that there is a war on men, you also have to claim that the violence being directed towards them is because they are men. Soldiers don’t kill other soldiers because they are men (which they may or may not be, I imagine most soldiers don’t care), they kill them because they fight for another country. Domestic violence in either direction is expressly sexual, which is why it’s important that it’s gender-biased.

  12. I agree with your bottom line, but are you making an assumption that all of the murderous intimate partners of men are female or is this stated in the original stats? Given a higher level of violence carried out by men, I would expect higher levels of male same-sex partner murder than female same-sex partner murder.

    As long as your talking gender disparities in death, how about suicides? I’m not exactly a WISQARS wizard, but it looks to me like men kill themselves at almost a 4:1 basis compared to women. If that was women dying at a higher prevalence it would be a crisis, but since it’s men it’s not important because they’re doing it to themselves?

    My bottom line is that there’s little that “a nation” can do to move these statistics other than increase prosperity. In the history of mankind, prosperity is the only non-culturally dependent variable that can increase the well being of humans, and economic freedom is the only culturally independent variable that can help us achieve greater prosperity.

  13. That’s absurd. Not once have I heard a man justify his actions because “she’s a woman”. “She cheated on me” or “she’s stupid” or “she stole from me”. Never ever “she’s female” or “I have the right to beat women”.

  14. For sake of accuracy, I don’t think blacks are most murderers/most murdered by raw numbers, although they are on a percentage basis (by 3 or 4x). I don’t have a link to the stats, but would appreciate if someone else does.

  15. It almost seems that progressive advocate groups, including the MSM have found a copy of “How to Lie with Statistics”, with the Lie with torn off the cover. It does seem that every trick presented in the book is used.

  16. The murder rate for African-American women is 6 times that of white women. Perhaps one way to end the War on Women is to convince African-American women from having African-American men as their partners. Of course, saying something like that is not acceptable in polite society.

  17. It’s really a chart showing what an amazing job Bush did in preventing casualties during the Afghan and Iraqi wars.

  18. It’s really a chart showing what an absolutely amazing job Bush did in preventing casualties during the Afghan and Iraqi wars.

  19. I would like to see the last two graphs with the death by strangers. It would seem likely that a good percentage of those are sexually random in that the killer did not care about the sex of the person they killed.

  20. That brings us to quite possibly the most intriguing match-up to that point of
    the season when Oregon comes to Rice-Eccles.

    The different types of defensive football positions
    are:. Many people are seeking out the latest Premiership news, as this is where much of the interest in English football is focused.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>