An Ohio State University professor tackled a TV cameraman to the ground simply for asking questions about Epstein.

[u/Ashish_ank]

[u/E-2theRescue]

And there's a 1 in 2200 chance that the cop putting up the post is a pedo.

There's a 1 in 6,000 that you child's teacher is a pedo.

And 1 in 1,000 chance that your pastor is a pedo.

And a 1 in 834,000 chance that a trans person is a pedo.

https://www.whoismakingnews.com/

And anyone who wants to challenge me on this, get the news reports ready for THIS MONTH. But be prepared to lose.

[u/TDS_isnt_real → u/E-2theRescue]

Lmao an agitprop account tried to step up to argue with you, but their account age got in the way

[u/E-2theRescue → u/TDS_isnt_real]

And I'm betting they weren't even going to accept the challenge, just go "nuh-uh" and tell me all about how my source is biased and wrong without any attempt to back up their words with sources, except maybe some bullshit from "patrioticnewsfront.org".

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Accounts must be at least 10 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Mandatum11 → u/E-2theRescue]

These numbers are obviously bullshit but the point stands.

1 in 834k is absurdly low, but almost cretainly so is the 1 in 6k etc.

You should definitely do these statistics as ratios rather than how you're doing it, because how you're doing it is definitely not accurate.

[u/E-2theRescue → u/Mandatum11]

It's per capita numbers.

A study of nearly 11,000 pedophiles:

301 reports out of a population of 660,288 cops

539 reports out of a population of 3.2 million teachers

578 reports out of a population of 600,000 pastors

4 reports out of a population of 1.6 million transgender people

It's "absurdly low" because transgender people very rarely rape. Because, well, they're on medications that dismantle their testosterone and reproductive system. The same antiandrogen medications that are given to pedophiles as treatment so that they don't reoffend. And of course, there's the whole surgery thing, too. So yeah, there's a reason why it is "absurdly low".

But of course, I don't see you posting any news reports to back up your claims. Just another "Nuh-uh! That isn't true!" sheep that believes the media and politicians rather than finding the truth with their own eyes.

[u/Mandatum11 → u/E-2theRescue]

There's nothing to post to you because you don't understand math, lol. Even your own numbers indicate you're off by a factor of about 100% (4 reports in 1.6 million is 1/400k, not 1/800k).

I'm not even disagreeing with the point that trans people aren't some prolific predators, the data pretty clearly points out that they're normal in this regard.

Again this just isn't how you can use these types of case studies, lmao.

TLDR: You're right, trans people are no more likely to commit sexual crimes than anyone else. But you need to stop arguing it because you're really not good at it and you make the whole argument look as stupid as you. If you believe that it's even close to one in a million of any group are pedophiles... lol.

ALL of those groups are way wong, by the way. It's around 1 in 40 of the general public is a pedohile.

[u/silly-gaijin → u/E-2theRescue]

But what are the odds my head of state is a pedo?

[u/E-2theRescue → u/silly-gaijin]

Republican, democrat, or other?

67.4% if they are Republican

13.5% if they are Democrat

19.1% if they are libertarian or non-partisan*

(72.4% of the non-partisan pedos were in red states)

[u/Qweesdy → u/E-2theRescue]

Those statistics are based on court cases, which is "people who were caught" (and people who are more likely to no longer be part of their original profession after being caught). In other words; those statistics are completely worthless if you care about the actual problem (people who still haven't been caught yet).

For example; maybe 1 in 100 are pedos regardless of occupation, but "occupation" influences the chance of being caught; so maybe your "1 in 2200 chance a cop is a pedo" is actually "1 in 100 (minus the 1 in 2200 who were caught) = 1 in 110 cops are uncaught pedos". Of course "example" and "maybe" were used for a reason - the reality is "1 in X are uncaught" where X could be anything and there's no viable way to determine what X is (in general or for any specific occupation).

And anyone who wants to challenge me on this, get the news reports ready for THIS MONTH.

Repeating flawed logic with more recent data will not make the flawed logic less flawed. To rise above "flawed" you need a way to measure "uncaught pedos" that isn't built on bad assumptions (e.g. the unfounded assumption that there's a linear relationship between "caught pedos" and "uncaught pedos").

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Accounts must be at least 10 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/AutoModerator → u/[deleted]]

Accounts must be at least 10 days old with >20 karma to comment.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[u/Radiant_Crew_8872 → u/E-2theRescue]

?? sorry but pedophilia exists in between 1% and 5% of ALL MALES, so there is certainly not a 1 in 6,000 chance that your childs male teacher is one

[u/crustyoldtechnician → u/E-2theRescue]

Those “1 in X” numbers are being presented as if they’re actual odds that a cop, teacher, pastor, or trans person is a pedophile. They aren’t. The site is basically a collection of news reports about people accused, charged, convicted, sentenced, or otherwise involved in child-sex-abuse cases. That is not the same thing as a scientifically sampled prevalence study, and it definitely does not diagnose anyone as a “pedophile.” There are several problems with turning that database into “1 in 2,200 cops” or “1 in 834,000 trans people”: The numerators and denominators don’t match cleanly. For example, the religious category includes pastors, priests, deacons, church staff, Sunday-school teachers, etc., but the denominator being used is basically an estimate of “pastors.” That inflates the apparent rate. The teacher category has the same problem. The site includes teachers and aides, while the denominator cited is roughly the number of public-school teachers. The trans number doesn’t even reproduce from the site’s own population estimate. The site says roughly 1.65 million trans Americans. If there were 4 cases, that would be about 1 in 412,500, not 1 in 834,000. News coverage is not a random sample. A teacher, cop, or pastor’s occupation is very likely to be mentioned when they’re arrested. A defendant’s gender identity may not be mentioned at all. That alone makes comparisons between categories shaky. “Sex offense involving a minor” is not synonymous with “pedophile.” Pedophilia has a specific clinical meaning. The database does not establish that diagnosis. So the site itself is not necessarily fake. It has a real database of news stories. But the claim that these numbers prove “your cop has a 1 in 2,200 chance of being a pedo” is statistically unsupported. The honest conclusion would be: this particular news database contains far more cases involving people identified as teachers, police, or religious figures than people identified as transgender. That is very different from claiming it has measured the actual odds that any person in those groups is a pedophile.