Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Congratulations, Catalina, {Added: and Francisco}
You {Added: two} did, among hundred of pages and numbers, post one line that has to do with your claim; I saw it:
//extramarital affairs resulted in up to 20% of male offenders who killed their ex-girlfriends. // {see at the end, for full quotation}
HOO-RAY
Catalina {added: and/or Francisco; 'you' will refer to either or both} says,
Do I have to explain to you what extramarital affairs means? To claim that when 24 % of the homicides are related to jealousy that if you are having an extramarital affair you are not running an additional risk is just plain stupid, especially if the data is there showing otherwise.
Now, let's inspect your one line of relevant evidence. It seemingly says--and you don't cite the original study-- of 'boyfriends' who kill spouses, in CHICAGO, over a 29 year period, UP TO 20% of them killed over (discovery of?) an extramarital affair. That means maybe 10% or 15% or up to 20%, the author isn't sure or doesn't say.
The author, however, doesn't give 20% as an "additional" risk.
Now in almost the same breath you refer to the figure of 24% for jealousy-based killings. That's for CANADA, for the 1991-1992 period.
Somehow you want to combine these numbers to suggest 'additional' risk from affairs? For what population? What country?
What, may I ask, does the data show about the magnitude of the 'additional risk'? Surely you don't believe the 20% figure (for affairs) for Chicago can be applied on top of the 24% figure (for jealousy) in Canada? (i.e., that the Chicagoan from Canada almost doubles the death risk through having an affair).
You give us a goulash of figures, from Hong Kong, US, Canada, etc. and don't appear to have any rationale for combining them or considering them together.
It's unclear in the Chicago study, but the Canadian study only uses ONE category for motive. I.e., it has to be quarrel or jealousy. The makes it impossible, or entirely opaque to me, to answer a question like "What's the additional risk of quarreling, above that for jealousy?". One would need overlapping categories, so that one could see of jealous ones how many got into quarreling also.
So the nature of the categories for the Chicago study is unclear; if they're like those of the Canadian study (one only is picked) you cant tell what the additional risk is for one category added to another. Iow, if, in CHICAGO, we knew, 30% of the killings were assigned to the jealousy category, and 20 % to the extramarital affairs category, and no events to both categories, one doesn't get a clear idea of what the 'addition' of an affair does to risk, in a jealous situation.
Really Pure read the links and the data, read the reports mentioned in the data, and compare the numbers before making claims.
My position is simple; you made some claims about dangers to those having affairs; that's to assume the burden of proof. While some 'cheaters' do get killed (everyone agrees), you've never producted any data about *additional* risk due to an affair.
Nor have you even acknowledged the dangers, apparent in your own citations, due to the 'straightforward' approach you find morally superior. (Tell him you want out.)
No doubt some can be flummoxed by lots of fancy sounding citations, urls for documents which you don't seem to have read recently, but most of us, here, I'm sure, can see that your data on AFFAIRS, and the risks or special risks of them has been minuscule [one line, above, for which you seem to want a medal] or non-existent.
J.
=====
Entire excerpt posted by Catalina or Francisco:
Jealousy appears to be the leading homicide motive in many studies, often caused by known or suspected adultery or the woman terminating the relationship. In their standardized homicide reporting, police in Canada identify one pertinent motive from their standard lists, which include categories such as “argument/quarrel”, “anger/hatred”, “general domestic”; in 1991-92, 52% of the intimate homicides were attributed by the police to an argument or quarrel and a further 24% to jealous. (Wilson & Daly, 1994).
Block and Christakos (1995) examined 2556 intimate partner homicides that occurred in Chicago over a 29-year period, and found sexual jealousy was a motive in up to 19% of male offenders who killed their former common-law partners and extramarital affairs resulted in up to 20% of male offenders who killed their ex-girlfriends.
You {Added: two} did, among hundred of pages and numbers, post one line that has to do with your claim; I saw it:
//extramarital affairs resulted in up to 20% of male offenders who killed their ex-girlfriends. // {see at the end, for full quotation}
HOO-RAY
Catalina {added: and/or Francisco; 'you' will refer to either or both} says,
Do I have to explain to you what extramarital affairs means? To claim that when 24 % of the homicides are related to jealousy that if you are having an extramarital affair you are not running an additional risk is just plain stupid, especially if the data is there showing otherwise.
Now, let's inspect your one line of relevant evidence. It seemingly says--and you don't cite the original study-- of 'boyfriends' who kill spouses, in CHICAGO, over a 29 year period, UP TO 20% of them killed over (discovery of?) an extramarital affair. That means maybe 10% or 15% or up to 20%, the author isn't sure or doesn't say.
The author, however, doesn't give 20% as an "additional" risk.
Now in almost the same breath you refer to the figure of 24% for jealousy-based killings. That's for CANADA, for the 1991-1992 period.
Somehow you want to combine these numbers to suggest 'additional' risk from affairs? For what population? What country?
What, may I ask, does the data show about the magnitude of the 'additional risk'? Surely you don't believe the 20% figure (for affairs) for Chicago can be applied on top of the 24% figure (for jealousy) in Canada? (i.e., that the Chicagoan from Canada almost doubles the death risk through having an affair).
You give us a goulash of figures, from Hong Kong, US, Canada, etc. and don't appear to have any rationale for combining them or considering them together.
It's unclear in the Chicago study, but the Canadian study only uses ONE category for motive. I.e., it has to be quarrel or jealousy. The makes it impossible, or entirely opaque to me, to answer a question like "What's the additional risk of quarreling, above that for jealousy?". One would need overlapping categories, so that one could see of jealous ones how many got into quarreling also.
So the nature of the categories for the Chicago study is unclear; if they're like those of the Canadian study (one only is picked) you cant tell what the additional risk is for one category added to another. Iow, if, in CHICAGO, we knew, 30% of the killings were assigned to the jealousy category, and 20 % to the extramarital affairs category, and no events to both categories, one doesn't get a clear idea of what the 'addition' of an affair does to risk, in a jealous situation.
Really Pure read the links and the data, read the reports mentioned in the data, and compare the numbers before making claims.
My position is simple; you made some claims about dangers to those having affairs; that's to assume the burden of proof. While some 'cheaters' do get killed (everyone agrees), you've never producted any data about *additional* risk due to an affair.
Nor have you even acknowledged the dangers, apparent in your own citations, due to the 'straightforward' approach you find morally superior. (Tell him you want out.)
No doubt some can be flummoxed by lots of fancy sounding citations, urls for documents which you don't seem to have read recently, but most of us, here, I'm sure, can see that your data on AFFAIRS, and the risks or special risks of them has been minuscule [one line, above, for which you seem to want a medal] or non-existent.
J.
=====
Entire excerpt posted by Catalina or Francisco:
Jealousy appears to be the leading homicide motive in many studies, often caused by known or suspected adultery or the woman terminating the relationship. In their standardized homicide reporting, police in Canada identify one pertinent motive from their standard lists, which include categories such as “argument/quarrel”, “anger/hatred”, “general domestic”; in 1991-92, 52% of the intimate homicides were attributed by the police to an argument or quarrel and a further 24% to jealous. (Wilson & Daly, 1994).
Block and Christakos (1995) examined 2556 intimate partner homicides that occurred in Chicago over a 29-year period, and found sexual jealousy was a motive in up to 19% of male offenders who killed their former common-law partners and extramarital affairs resulted in up to 20% of male offenders who killed their ex-girlfriends.
Last edited:
