Reginald Thompson

Posts

More Marriage, Less Rape

Reginald Thompson: Research shows that remaining unmarried greatly increases the chances that a woman will be raped, while living with a husband greatly decreases her chances of being raped.

According to the FBI Crime Victimization Survey, the average unmarried female over the age of 12 had a 0.37% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted in 2006.

In contrast, the average married female over the age of 12 had only a 0.04% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted that year.

That’s a staggering risk factor for single women of being 9.3 times more likely to be raped!

Now you might think this is due to single women tending to be younger, and younger women being more likely to be raped. But that idea is refuted by the fact that divorced women, on average older than single women, are even more likely to be raped than single women are.

Divorced or seperated women had a 0.43% chance of being raped or sexually assaulted in 2006, which means they had a 10.8 times greater chance of being raped than the married women did, and a 16% greater chance than the Single women.

Intriguingly, single women are also 3.7 times more likely to be subjected to violent crime than married women are, while being 5.5 times more likely to be subjected to completed violence.

Also, they are 4.9 times more likely to be robbed, 3.1 times more likely to be subjected to aggravated assault, and 3.5 times more likely to be subjected to simple assault.

So single women are at an elevated risk for all kinds of violent crime, but none so much as rape and sexual assault.  This is doubtless due to the sexual nature of the relationship between a husband and wife, and the fact that by marrying a man, a woman provides herself with a physically stronger companion who has a profound evolutionary interest in protecting her sexuality.

But does it follow from these findings that if women spent more of their lives married, the overall rape rate would decline?

Or would rapists just compensate by raping the remaining single women at a higher rate?

To find out I got the rape rate for 18 years from 1960 to 2007, and checked it against the median age at first marriage for women in those years.  What I found was a very strong +.602 correlation between the rape rate and median age at first marriage for women, with a statistically significant P Value of .008.

This means that 36% of the explosive increase in rape from 1960 to 2007 is explained simply by the catastrophic trend of more and more American women delaying marriage until later in life.

In sharp contrast, variation in median age at first marriage explains only a paltry 3.3% of the variation in the overall crime rate. This shows that there’s something very special about the relationship between age at first marriage and rape, and that the correlation between them isn’t just a question of median age at first marriage corresponding with some other factor that has an influence on crime.

Given this data, it is clear that anyone who actually has the best interests of women at heart will encourage them to get married as early in life as is reasonably possible.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Bookmark and Share

Bookmark and Share

Legalized Pornography and Demographic Genocide

Reginald Thompson:

“A primary cause of low fertility in the Greco-Roman world was a male culture that held marriage in low esteem.” -Rodney Stark, The Rise of Christianity

A problem with legalized pornography is that if you allow pornography to become too widely consumed, its degraded vision of women will eat away at the capacity of men to fall in love with members of the opposite sex.   This reduced capacity for romantic love will make the men of a society less interested in the joys and challenges of stable pair bond based reproduction. Pornography encourages recreational sex rather than marriage and  children.

Also, pornography will discourage men from participating in stable pair bonds by tricking their Limbic Systems into thinking they’re getting so much sex that there’s no need to settle down.

Given that stable pair bond based sex is by far the most valuable from the standpoint of increasing the birth rate, I decided to do some research on whether legalized pornography correlates with a country having reduced fertility.

From Wikipedia I found a list of 45 Countries where it was possible to assign their pornography laws to one of three categories: Pornography Banned, Semi-Legalized Pornography, or fully Legalized Pornography.

Then I looked at the 2000 TFR Rates for these countries as provided by the CIA World Factbook:

N    Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned         19            2.73

Pornography Semi-Legal     5            1.69

Pornography Fully Legal   21            1.67

As can be seen, there’s a stunningly large gap in fertility between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is wholly or partially legal.  In fact, the gap is great enough that even with a sample size of only 45 countries, the Mann-Whitney test of the difference between two means gives a P Value of only .000005.

Could this discrepancy be driven by White countries almost all having legal pornography while having low Fertility for other reasons?

No it couldn’t, as the discrepancy is almost exactly the same even after we throw the White countries out of the equation!

N    Total Fertility Rate

Pornogrpahy Banned        17             2.85

Pornography Semi-Legal   1              3.11

Pornography Legal              6              1.79

But what about the possibility that Muslims countries almost all have illegal pornography while at the same time having higher Birth Rates for other reasons?

That can’t be what’s driving the result either, as the correlation remains nearly as strong even after throwing out all the Muslim countries:

N    Total Fertility Rate

Pornography Banned        19            2.35

Pornography Semi-Legal    5            1.69

Pornography Legal             10            1.63

At the same time there might be more subtle differences between countries where pornography is banned and countries where it is not that could be partially driving this result.

The real question from a practical standpoint is whether legalizing pornography in a country will drive down fertility. If that is the case, we can rightfully conclude that reversing the legalization of pornography in a country would be of great benefit to its Birth Rate.

From the CDC I found tables showing the Total Fertility Rate for America in the years 1940 to 2000.

Then I decided to look up the Total Fertility Rate for the 5 years before and 5 years after two key Supreme Court rulings that made it essentially impossible to arrest an American for distributing or possessing obscene materials, and which opened never before seen floodgates of pornography.

Jacobellis v. Ohio    Stanley v. Georgia

TFR For 5 Years Before          3.53                           2.62

TFR For 5 Years After              2.77                           2.04

As can be seen, America’s Total Fertility Rate suffered a profound decline in response to the Supreme Court’s two most important rulings in favor of the pornography industry.

Also, when I put whether a year came before or after Jacobellis v. Ohio and Stanley v. Georgia as Dummy Variables in a Multiple Regression, together they explained a staggering 77% of the variation in American fertility from 1940 to 2000!

I think the implications of these findings to White Advocates should be loud and clear: The use of pornography by Whites should be fought tooth and nail, and the banning of pornography in White majority countries and states should be set as a central long-term goal.

Notes: Jacobellis v. Ohio was a 1964 ruling by the Supreme Court that the exhibitor of a film judged obscene by the state of Ohio could not be prosecuted. This had the effect of making it nearly impossible for States to punish people for disseminating pornography.

Stanley v. Georgia was a 1969 ruling by the Supreme Court that invalidated all state laws forbidding the private possession of materials judged obscene. This effectively gave everyone in the country the legal right to buy and hold as much pornography as they could their hands on, thus creating a state of affairs never before seen in American history.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Bookmark and Share

How Pro-Life Are White Evangelicals?

Reginald Thompson: White Evangelicals talk a good game when it comes to being Pro-Life, which is here defined as words or actions that cause more children to have life, and less unborn children to be annihilated in the womb.

But are they just putting on a show to make themselves look righteous, with the possible motive of improving their own self-regard?

To find out I looked at the 2008 Presidential Exit Polls to determine the percentage of voters in the 39 states with the relevant data who described themselves as White Evangelicals.

Then I looked up the Abortion and White Total Fertility Rates for these 39 States.

Now hopefully there’s a positive correlation between White Evangelicals and White Babies, and a Negative Correlation between White Evangelicals and Abortions. For one thing, I really don’t want to be made more cynical than I already am.

Abortion         White TFR
White Evangelical              -.692              +.553

Churched                               -.517               +.399

As can be seen above, both the arrows of correlation are strong and in the predicted direction.

Moreover, we can see that though White Evangelicals are greatly outnumbered by the Churched (here defined as people who report visiting Church at least once a week), they nonetheless have a stronger influence on the Abortion and White Fertility Rates of a State.

And remarkably, even though the positive correlation between percent White Evangelical and the White Total Fertility Rate is smaller than the negative correlation found with Abortion, we find 31% of the State to State variation in White TFR is explained by the Percentage of White Evangelicals in a State.

And this is being accomplished by a group that was only 26% of the voters in the 2008 Election!

Recently on My Blog I reported the correlation I found between White Ethnocentrism, as measured by the capacity to elect Senators against giving Amnesty to Illegal Immigrants, and White Fertility.

Given this finding, I find it extremely notable in this context that Evangelical Protestants were found by a recent poll to have the most Ethnocentric Attitudes toward Immigration of any major American Religious Group:

% Supporting Enforcement over Amnesty

Evangelicals                                    +64%
Other Protestant.                         +41%
Catholics                                          +41%
Jews                                                    +3%

Like I said in my post about ethnocentrism and fertility: Love for one’s family and love for one’s race spring forth from the same roots.  And I think this is the best explanation for my finding that members of the most ethnocentric Major White Religious Group cause the White Birth Rate to go up simply by virtue of there being more of them in a state.

Bookmark and Share

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

How Should a White Female Evaluate Potential Rape Threats?

Reginald Thompson: If a White female encounters a White man and a Black man in the same day, the Black male is at least 9 Times More Likely to Rape her.

Obviously, if a woman is wary of being raped she’ll assess a Man in his twenties as a greater potential threat than an old man or a little boy. Also, it is thought by many women that certain traits in the appearance of a Man, such as a scuzzy hairstyle and clothing, tends to correlate with an increased likelihood of him being a rapist. But what about the most obvious and unmistakable of appearance traits, whether a man is White or Black? Would it make sense for White females to assess the threat of rape as being significantly greater from the average Black male she encounters?

The answer from the Statistical Data is a very clear yes.

Looking at the 2005 FBI Uniform Crime Report we find that though Blacks are only 12.4% of the US Population, they commit 33.6% of the rapes of White females.

This means that even if we assume totally random racial assortment, where a White female is just as likely to encounter the average Black male as she is to encounter the average White male, we would still have to conclude that a Black male is 2.7 times more likely to rape a White female than the average male she encounters.

But here’s the thing: There’s clearly not random racial assortment in America, so the increased rape risk to a White female for every Black male she encounters is even greater than that.

Probably the closest thing we can find to a meaningful estimate of what percentage of the Males encountered by a White female are Black is to look at how Black a neighborhood the average White lives in.

I found some data taken from the 2000 Census saying the average White lives in a neighborhood that is 6.7% Black.

There are two problems with using this as the baseline for the Percentage of Rapes of White females committed by Blacks though:

1. It is only data for Metropolitan Counties, and leaves out Rural Counties that have fewer Blacks.

2. It fails to take into account the effects of intra-neighborhood racial assortment resulting from implicit Whiteness.  For example, it could be there’s a neighborhood that’s 50% White and 50% Black, but where the Whites primarily go to the restaurant that serves food White people like, while the Blacks go to the restaurant that serves food Black people like. This sort of thing will create a situation where even in a 50% Black neighborhood, the White females living there will have much less than 50% of the males they encounter be Black.

So bear very closely in mind that using 6.7% as the proportion of Black people met by White females is likely a strong overestimation, and therefore that the figures below underestimate the degree of increased rape risk a White female incurs when she encounters a Black male.

White Males   Black Males

Percent of Encounters          80.2%             6.7%

Percent of Rapes                   44.5%              33.6%

Impact Value                          .55                    5.01

This means that while the average Black male encountered by a White female is 5.01 Times more likely to rape her than the average male, the average White male she encounters is almost half as likely to rape her as the average male. It also implies that if a White female encounters a White and Black male, the Black is 9.1 times more likely to rape her than the White.

It is all too clear from this data that Black rapists are deliberately targeting White females.  This could be because of racial hatred for Whites, and possibly also because they perceive White females as being more sexually desirable than women of their own race.

Strong evidence in favor of the racial animus explanation playing a crucial role here can be found in the fact that when a Black man marries a White woman, he is 82% more likely to Murder her than if he was married to a Black women.

In conclusion, White women have every right to be “paranoid” about Black men. It’s the White women who aren’t afraid of Black men that have something wrong with them.

Reginald Thompson is the Pen Name of an Advisor to an International Software Company. He lives on the American East Coast and is proprietor/manager of a recently created Blog called Statsaholic.

Bookmark and Share