Sweden and Denmark have highest number of sexual assaults in Europe - Polidicks

[QUOTE]Sweden and Denmark have highest number of sexual assaults in Europe. Sweden and Denmark are the countries where the most sexual assaults occur in the EU. A chart compiled by Statista for•The Independent•shows the percentage of people who said they experienced sexual harassment as adults•in the EU’s member states. The results are based on data from 2012, published by the European Agency for Fundamental Rights, in its 2014 report,•Violence against women: an EU-wide survey. • The data shows that in Sweden and Denmark, 80 to 100 per cent of people said they were sexually assaulted as adults – the highest anywhere in the continent. In the UK, France, Germany, and Finland, 60 to 79 per cent of people said they were sexually assaulted. A report on the data states: “The observed variations between EU member states in the prevalence rates of sexual harassment can be explained by a number of factors looked at in combination. “For example, the different level of acknowledgement of sexual harassment in national legislation and its prioritisation in specific policies and political debates might be reflected in women’s overall level of awareness of sexual harassment as a fundamental rights abuse, and their disclosure of such experiences.” [/QUOTE] [URL="http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html"]http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/sweden-and-denmark-have-highest-number-of-sexual-assaults-in-europe-a6800901.html[/URL]

[quote]A chart compiled by Statista for•The Independent•shows the percentage of [B]people who said they experienced sexual harassment as adults[/B]•in the EU’s member states.[/quote] A factor that has been constantly underlined to keep in mind, not all nations have the same thoughts about what sexual harassment means and culture probably plays a part in how people answer these surveys. [editline]8th January 2016[/editline] [quote]It said: “Over the past 10 to 15 years, immigrants have mainly come [into Sweden] from Muslim countries such as Iraq, Syria and Somalia. Might this influx explain Sweden’s rape explosion? “It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion. “One possible explanation is that, on average, people from the Middle East have a vastly different view of women and sex than Scandinavians have. “And despite the attempts by the Swedish establishment to convince that everyone setting foot on Swedish soil becomes exactly like those who have lived here for dozens of generations, facts point in an altogether different direction.” [/quote] And I don't really get these paragraphs, "Yeah it might be because of this - but we have no idea because we haven't done any investigating" A+ article, go journalism!

[QUOTE]A report on the data states: “The observed variations between EU member states in the prevalence rates of sexual harassment can be explained by a number of factors looked at in combination. “For example, the different level of acknowledgement of sexual harassment in national legislation and its prioritisation in specific policies and political debates might be reflected in women’s overall level of awareness of sexual harassment as a fundamental rights abuse, and their disclosure of such experiences.”[/QUOTE] did you even read this before you posted it? [QUOTE]“It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion.[/QUOTE] basically they took an impartial EU report that offered a number of other possible factors and added a tacked on "maybe its the muslims you guys...." at the end with no actual evidence that there's a correlation

[QUOTE]“It is difficult to give a precise answer, because Swedish law forbids registration based on people’s ancestry or religion."[/QUOTE] Would be interesting if they did investigate the ancestry/religions of the criminals.

My guess is basically the same as the one in the last paragraph of OP's quote - people are pretty well aware of what constitutes sexual assault and what does not. I don't buy the immigrant connection, the UK has a higher percentage of immigrants compared to Denmark, and so does a bunch of other countries.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49486697]Would be interesting if they did investigate the ancestry/religions of the criminals.[/QUOTE] Without having read the article, but only the comments so far. I wanna share my insight with you guys, IIRC roughly 30-40% of all rape accusations are made on false grounds. So yeah, while it could be interesting to see the number of how many "foreigners" raped and how many traditional danish people raped, i am more interested in seeing which factors they have considered during this study. Also fun fact, something i read in the newspaper not too long ago, in 1968 only 13% thought that if a women after having dinner with a man, went home with the man to drink a glass of wine and the man then proceeded to kiss her and take her panties off, while she clearly says no, that it wouldn't be rape, cause she was teasing him. The same question was giving some several years after with better results and finally, recently the question was asked agian where 93% of the danish population meant it would count as rape. Edit: Just found the article about the percentage thing, it's in danish though. Also to lazy to correct the numbers, but they are pretty much the same

[QUOTE=Disfunctional;49489330]Without having read the article, but only the comments so far. I wanna share my insight with you guys, IIRC roughly 30-40% of all rape accusations are made on false grounds. So yeah, while it could be interesting to see the number of how many "foreigners" raped and how many traditional danish people raped, i am more interested in seeing which factors they have considered during this study. Also fun fact, something i read in the newspaper not too long ago, in 1968 only 13% thought that if a women after having dinner with a man, went home with the man to drink a glass of wine and the man then proceeded to kiss her and take her panties off, while she clearly says no, that it wouldn't be rape, cause she was teasing him. The same question was giving some several years after with better results and finally, recently the question was asked agian where 93% of the danish population meant it would count as rape. Edit: Just found the article about the percentage thing, it's in danish though. Also to lazy to correct the numbers, but they are pretty much the same[/QUOTE] How exactly are you quantifying fake accusations? As far as I know they are next to impossible to properly measure

[QUOTE=GoDong-DK;49489169]My guess is basically the same as the one in the last paragraph of OP's quote - people are pretty well aware of what constitutes sexual assault and what does not. I don't buy the immigrant connection, the UK has a higher percentage of immigrants compared to Denmark, and so does a bunch of other countries.[/QUOTE] We really can't know. Obviously correlation doesn't mean causation but its a bit strange that we're seeing tons of rape attacks all across Europe thanks to the refugee crisis and its strange that the country with the most migrants in relation to its native population is the rape capitol of the world.

[QUOTE=Disfunctional;49489330]Without having read the article, but only the comments so far. I wanna share my insight with you guys, IIRC roughly 30-40% of all rape accusations are made on false grounds. So yeah, while it could be interesting to see the number of how many "foreigners" raped and how many traditional danish people raped, i am more interested in seeing which factors they have considered during this study. Also fun fact, something i read in the newspaper not too long ago, in 1968 only 13% thought that if a women after having dinner with a man, went home with the man to drink a glass of wine and the man then proceeded to kiss her and take her panties off, while she clearly says no, that it wouldn't be rape, cause she was teasing him. The same question was giving some several years after with better results and finally, recently the question was asked agian where 93% of the danish population meant it would count as rape. Edit: Just found the article about the percentage thing, it's in danish though. Also to lazy to correct the numbers, but they are pretty much the same[/QUOTE] Ah yes, it took only six posts for the inevitable 'but muh false rape accusations' post. Stay classy, Facepunch.

[QUOTE=Antdawg;49490487]'but muh false rape accusations'[/QUOTE] They do in fact happen. There are probably plenty of people in prison over this, since this is a crime based entirely upon the idea of consent.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49490599]They do in fact happen. There are probably plenty of people in prison over this, since this is a crime based entirely upon the idea of consent.[/QUOTE] But surely you need evidence in order to imprison someone, otherwise how would they be in jail over false accusations?

[QUOTE=FreyasFighter;49491096]But surely you need evidence in order to imprison someone, otherwise how would they be in jail over false accusations?[/QUOTE] many rape cases are literally decided by whichever parties story is more convincing. If someone decides to report you for rape after having consensual sex, they technically have "DNA" evidence, and at that point it's just he-said she-said.

[QUOTE=soulharvester;49491139]many rape cases are literally decided by whichever parties story is more convincing. If someone decides to report you for rape after having consensual sex, they technically have "DNA" evidence, and at that point it's just he-said she-said.[/QUOTE] Not sure about Sweden but in the US and Canada we have a thing called plea bargains.

I don't like plea bargains, either they're putting innocent people away for crimes they didn't commit, or they're letting actual criminals off light, it's counter-intuitive.

[QUOTE=FreyasFighter;49491096]But surely you need evidence in order to imprison someone, otherwise how would they be in jail over false accusations?[/QUOTE]... Uh!? That already fucking happens all the goddamn time, that's the exact reason why "beyond a reasonable doubt" and "innocent until proven guilty" are big deals in our legal system! In spite of that the bullshit sensationalism of a trial and the pleas to emotion can [I]still[/I] get a guy convicted for a rape he didn't commit simply because the defense was too stupid, too lazy, (public defenders yay!) or simply unable to conclusively prove that it was impossible. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] [url]http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/preps/football/story/2012-05-24/brian-banks-rape-conviction-overturned/55192420/1[/url] Stellar fucking example of this. This guy was accused of raping a fellow student and faced with a long fucking time in serious pound-me-in-the-ass prison because nobody would believe he didn't rape her he took a plea deal and served five years in prison for [I]a crime he didn't even commit.[/I]

[QUOTE=soulharvester;49491139]many rape cases are literally decided by whichever parties story is more convincing. If someone decides to report you for rape after having consensual sex, they technically have "DNA" evidence, and at that point it's just he-said she-said.[/QUOTE] Keeping in mind that rape has an incredibly low conviction rate, how would you suggest changing the law? Because it seems to me like the system is working. Theoretically it comes down to the person with the most convincing story but in practice the most convincing story tends to come from the defendant orders of magnitudes more than it comes from the prosecution. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49491244] [url]http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/sports/preps/football/story/2012-05-24/brian-banks-rape-conviction-overturned/55192420/1[/url] Stellar fucking example of this. This guy was accused of raping a fellow student and faced with a long fucking time in serious pound-me-in-the-ass prison because nobody would believe he didn't rape her he took a plea deal and served five years in prison for [I]a crime he didn't even commit.[/I][/QUOTE] I blame his defense more than the legal stipulation for sexual assault charges.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49491257]I blame his defense more than the legal stipulation for sexual assault charges.[/QUOTE]That should have [B]never[/B] gone to charges at all, the DA should have looked at the complete lack of DNA evidence (that she said was there) and her wild inconsistencies and tossed her the fuck out. Even then when it did go they badgered a young teenager into signing a confession (this is a major fucking problem with the way our police operate in this country, I've said it several times before) and he actually did it because he believed he'd be in prison for most of his life. Everything that happened to him was disgusting and it boggles my mind when people go "yeah but does that really happen???" because yes it fucking does. (not that FreyasFighter was saying that)

It has, and should have, a low conviction rate because it's inherently difficult to prove what was or was not consensual without witnesses or other evidence. I don't approve of people going to jail because they had a slightly worse lawyer or aren't good at communicating. So his defense is at fault? Why the hell did she receive $1.5 million? So it's acceptable that people are thrown into prison because their defense wasn't able to convince people's emotional side? I'm sorry, and I don't like this anymore than you do, but rape should be inherently difficult to prosecute for and convictions SHOULD be based primarily on solid evidence or third party testimony. It's just an inherently difficult to prove crime due to it's nature.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49491300]That should have [B]never[/B] gone to charges at all, the DA should have looked at the complete lack of DNA evidence (that she said was there) and her wild inconsistencies and tossed her the fuck out. Even then when it did go they badgered a young teenager into signing a confession (this is a major fucking problem with the way our police operate in this country, I've said it several times before) and he actually did it because he believed he'd be in prison for most of his life. Everything that happened to him was disgusting and it boggles my mind when people go "yeah but does that really happen???" because yes it fucking does. (not that FreyasFighter was saying that)[/QUOTE] I missed the forest for the trees and was looking into the plea bargain while completely missing the lack of DNA evidence. They apparently didn't even have sex. I think it's suffice to say that cases like these are extremely rare even in the realm of rape convictions which themselves are tiny. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=soulharvester;49491318]It has, and should have, a low conviction rate because it's inherently difficult to prove what was or was not consensual without witnesses or other evidence. I don't approve of people going to jail because they had a slightly worse lawyer or aren't good at communicating. So his defense is at fault? Why the hell did she receive $1.5 million? So it's acceptable that people are thrown into prison because their defense wasn't able to convince people's emotional side? I'm sorry, and I don't like this anymore than you do, but rape should be inherently difficult to prosecute for and convictions SHOULD be based primarily on solid evidence or third party testimony. It's just an inherently difficult to prove crime due to it's nature.[/QUOTE] I don't disagree with anything you said in this post I'm just trying to understand what you find unsatisfactory currently. I never argued that the conviction rate should be higher than where it is but the way you said "he said she said" implies it's 50/50 when it's really no where near true and the worries about the prosecution finding the juries emotional side and putting innocent people in jail aren't really warranted given the fact that the opposite happens at a ratio of 97:3. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] His defense is at fault for convincing him to go with a plea bargain when the prosecution had absolutely no evidence.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49491324]I missed the forest for the trees and was looking into the plea bargain while completely missing the lack of DNA evidence. They apparently didn't even have sex. I think it's suffice to say that cases like these are extremely rare even in the realm of rape convictions which themselves are tiny.[/QUOTE]Well even if it happened once out of a thousand cases it's still one time too many, our legal system is founded on the idea that it's better a criminal go free than an innocent suffer prison. Plus whenever shit like this happens it undermines the credibility of rape victims everywhere.

[QUOTE=JumpinJackFlash;49491340]Well even if it happened once out of a thousand cases it's still one time too many, our legal system is founded on the idea that it's better a criminal go free than an innocent suffer prison. Plus whenever shit like this happens it undermines the credibility of rape victims everywhere.[/QUOTE] Okay then what is your suggestion for changing the way the laws regarding rape and consent? Ending wrongful imprisonment is noble but is as practical as trying to stop people lying. It's just not going to happen. The tacit understanding that our legal system is flawed by the human element is one of the key points against capital punishment, the idea that we can never be 100% sure in every case that the person we are executing actually did the thing they are convicted of doing.

The laws are fine, it's the execution that is flawed. Plea bargains for instance shouldn't be presented to people as "Here's the deal, we're going to convict you, so either take this 5 years the easy way, or life in prison the hard way".

In looking up how plea bargains impact rape convictions, it seems one of the contributing factors to the low rate of rape convictions is actually that many cases of rape get bargained down to assault, which is less stigmatizing and carries less of a penalty. There are pros and cons to the concept of plea bargains but I don't see it changing in the United States any time soon.

Yeah first of all the study was conducted by asking people, which isn't a credible source of information. I personally know feminazis who would say they got harassed or assaulted or whatever to "bring awareness" to this problem. Also I'm pretty sure people have different views on what is considered sexual harassment or sexual assault. There are people here who thinks they have been harassed when a man talks to them on the bus ffs. However I will say that if you consider cat-calling or picking up people harassment, 80% is probably not so far from the truth. Secondly, this article heavily implies that this is connected to immigration and while I think they are onto something it's not warranted to make that connection with the data from the study. In other words horrible agenda-pushing journalism.

[QUOTE=maeZtro;49491412]I personally know feminazis who would say they got harassed or assaulted or whatever to "bring awareness" to this problem. Also I'm pretty sure people have different views on what is considered sexual harassment or sexual assault. There are people here who thinks they have been harassed when a man talks to them on the bus ffs. However I will say that if you consider cat-calling or picking up people harassment, 80% is probably not so far from the truth. [/QUOTE] Why don't you ask a real life female about harassment? It can even be one you know like your mum or older sister! They aren't just making it up. "Feminazis" aren't the only women who think they've been harassed. Most women will say they've been harassed because they have. It's not up to you to decide that cat-calling isn't harassment because it is. Thh you destroyed any argument you had as soon as you typed feminazi.

[QUOTE=NeonpieDFTBA;49490393]How exactly are you quantifying fake accusations? As far as I know they are next to impossible to properly measure[/QUOTE] It's not even close to impossible to measure false rape accusations, it's just hard because the only way to record one is when there is evidence that proves that the accusation is false, such as a rock solid alibi or video footage of what actually happened. I think the studies that get numbers as high as 40 percent just count any accusation that doesn't result in conviction as false, or maybe it was accusations that don't even result in an investigation, but don't quote me on that. They're probably wrong, but identifying a false accusation is as easy as having counter evidence.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49490450]We really can't know. Obviously correlation doesn't mean causation but its a bit strange that we're seeing tons of rape attacks all across Europe thanks to the refugee crisis and its strange that the country with the most migrants in relation to its native population is the rape capitol of the world.[/QUOTE] % of muslims is a pretty good proxy for middle-eastern immigration, so let's go with [url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Islam_in_Europe]that[/url] for data. Seven countries in this survey has muslim populations larger than Denmark's and in the same 5-10% segment as Sweden. Even going by correlation = causation, the evidence is lacking. I'm not saying immigrants don't or can't in any way change the frequency of sexual assault, but I don't think this map is very good at showing it. Maybe if we dug deeper and figured out where those immigrants are from we would see some correlation, but I don't really want to waste time doing so.

[QUOTE=Rangergxi;49490450]we're seeing tons of rape attacks all across Europe thanks to the refugee crisis.[/QUOTE] We do? Citation needed.

[QUOTE=Doozle;49491505]Why don't you ask a real life female about harassment? It can even be one you know like your mum or older sister! They aren't just making it up. "Feminazis" aren't the only women who think they've been harassed. Most women will say they've been harassed because they have. It's not up to you to decide that cat-calling isn't harassment because it is. Thh you destroyed any argument you had as soon as you typed feminazi.[/QUOTE] I've never said that feminazis are the only women who say they have been harassed and the reason I use the term feminazi in the first place is because I want to diffrentiate between extremists and "normal" women who gets harassed. If you don't want to adress my argument because I used a word you don't like then that's on you but then why answer me in the first place? Also I never said that cat-calling can't be harassment, I think it's more complex than that. You can cat-call and say things that are ok and you can cat-call and say things that's not. My point was that since there are people here (Sweden) who thinks that a man saying hello constitutes harassment that is going to affect the result of the study. I must also say that I find it interesting that you seem to know what I personally have and have not done. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] You have basically made a condescending post adressing why you think things I have never said is wrong.

[QUOTE=Raidyr;49491356]Okay then what is your suggestion for changing the way the laws regarding rape and consent?[/QUOTE]Laws are mostly fine, but as for my suggestion? Criminalize false accusations entirely, carries the same penalty as the crime accused. I don't imagine many of those convictions would happen, but I imagine a lot of the cry wolf bullshit would come to a screeching halt. [editline]9th January 2016[/editline] Oh and take that plea bargain shit and throw it away. If I could do away with plea bargains I would, they're complete bullshit in these circumstances and are only really useful in obtaining useful information on other parties and getting people to cough up accomplices.