Pure
Fiel a Verdad
- Joined
- Dec 20, 2001
- Posts
- 15,135
Francisco said,
I would like to point you to a mistake you have made in your calculations.
Page 5.
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.
Source:
Intimate Partner Violence
By Callie Marie Rennison, Ph.D. and Sarah Welchans BJS Statisticians
Page 10.
Intimate partner homicide, by gender, 1998 Females 1,317
A child can do the math now:
20 %, results in 263 deaths in 1998 where the direct result of extramarital affairs, Ok the number is not huge, I mean what we are talking about 263 women murdered by their partner. Because of extramarital affairs, if we now add the numbers of the jealous boyfriends who have killed their SO. Which is 19 % of the total we get an additional 250 deaths.
Total number 513 deaths, yes this is not a huge number but this is every year over and over again. This however is just the tip of the Iceberg, these are the worst case scenarios, were it has resulted in death.
=====
Thanks for reading the document.
The first point is that, supposing you are right, I would point out the impact on the final ratio, which I said was 16 to 1. Your figures result in 10 to 1. The woman is ten times as likely to die in traffic as from a jealous husband.
Yes, this holds each year; carnage on highways and smaller carnage in domestic violence. I did extrapolate the risks over 40 yrs.
Now as to your argument. First we are dealing with a summary of Bloch's study and neither of us appear to have looked at it. The summary just isn't clear or precise in the area we want.
My argument is that: 1) probably the two categories are exclusive; and that, I suggest,2) affairs were placed in the affair category only. So the 'jealousy' category, I suggest is where no mention was made of an affair. Now, *some percentage* may be due to affairs not reported, but surely you know jealousy isn't based in the real. Also, if real, it can be 'you danced too long with him. ' So I'd say, being generous, allow only 1/2 of the jealousy cases (or 9%) as related to actual affairs of the wife.
The math is 263 + 250/2 = 388. I used 312. The 388 figure gives a ratio of about 13 as opposed to 16.
There's one additional reason for preferring the lower number.
The Canadian data did NOT break out affairs separately, but used jealousy, I think, to cover both. That percentage was 25%. Which suggests that your proposal of 40% is high. I can live with 30%. With the Canadian data, of course, there are 'quarrels', and so it's unclear how many of those might be affair related, but a quarrel over an affair sounds like jealousy to me.
Of course I don't like that three or four hundred women get murdered by hubbies, or that 1000 die of AIDS. The context of the argument though, was a woman contemplating an affair or a man having the opportunity. Hence the question of relative risk.
You use the phrase "a bullshit argument as is comparing intimate homicides to road accidents."
I remind you that the whole exercise was started when you or Catalina quoted some factoid about deaths related to cheating being more than from accidents in airplanes and trains combined. I assume you'll acknowledge that that was a bullshit argument or factoid, as well (misleading, if not untrue).
It would be pleasant if you showed the tiniest bit of positive valence toward the work presented; if you noted that data were presented in an orderly fashion allowing your analysis. If the quarrel whether the ratio is 13 or 16, remains unsettled, I think that's pretty good agreement.
Best,
J.
Added: There is another argument that the 40% you propose is too high. We know that, on some estimates, about 1/3 of married women have cheated. Now that's a cumulative figure, so how many have cheated in a given year? 1/6, 1/10.
But, taking 1/3 for the sake of arguement, as the ones getting killed likely to show a very different percentage? Well, there are two arguments.
You're in effect taking the First: there is *higher* proportion of cheating wifes in those who get killed. These are the adventurous or desperate one that catch the flak.
Second. Among the killed, affairs are less common. Those getting killed have often been abused. They are intimidated and NOT adventurous; they often have histories of being assaulted, which make them careful if not scared.
I lean toward the latter. Hence I'm happy with the 1/4 to 1/5 [of all women murdered in intimate homicide] as an estimate.
I would like to point you to a mistake you have made in your calculations.
Page 5.
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.
Source:
Intimate Partner Violence
By Callie Marie Rennison, Ph.D. and Sarah Welchans BJS Statisticians
Page 10.
Intimate partner homicide, by gender, 1998 Females 1,317
A child can do the math now:
20 %, results in 263 deaths in 1998 where the direct result of extramarital affairs, Ok the number is not huge, I mean what we are talking about 263 women murdered by their partner. Because of extramarital affairs, if we now add the numbers of the jealous boyfriends who have killed their SO. Which is 19 % of the total we get an additional 250 deaths.
Total number 513 deaths, yes this is not a huge number but this is every year over and over again. This however is just the tip of the Iceberg, these are the worst case scenarios, were it has resulted in death.
=====
Thanks for reading the document.
The first point is that, supposing you are right, I would point out the impact on the final ratio, which I said was 16 to 1. Your figures result in 10 to 1. The woman is ten times as likely to die in traffic as from a jealous husband.
Yes, this holds each year; carnage on highways and smaller carnage in domestic violence. I did extrapolate the risks over 40 yrs.
Now as to your argument. First we are dealing with a summary of Bloch's study and neither of us appear to have looked at it. The summary just isn't clear or precise in the area we want.
My argument is that: 1) probably the two categories are exclusive; and that, I suggest,2) affairs were placed in the affair category only. So the 'jealousy' category, I suggest is where no mention was made of an affair. Now, *some percentage* may be due to affairs not reported, but surely you know jealousy isn't based in the real. Also, if real, it can be 'you danced too long with him. ' So I'd say, being generous, allow only 1/2 of the jealousy cases (or 9%) as related to actual affairs of the wife.
The math is 263 + 250/2 = 388. I used 312. The 388 figure gives a ratio of about 13 as opposed to 16.
There's one additional reason for preferring the lower number.
The Canadian data did NOT break out affairs separately, but used jealousy, I think, to cover both. That percentage was 25%. Which suggests that your proposal of 40% is high. I can live with 30%. With the Canadian data, of course, there are 'quarrels', and so it's unclear how many of those might be affair related, but a quarrel over an affair sounds like jealousy to me.
Of course I don't like that three or four hundred women get murdered by hubbies, or that 1000 die of AIDS. The context of the argument though, was a woman contemplating an affair or a man having the opportunity. Hence the question of relative risk.
You use the phrase "a bullshit argument as is comparing intimate homicides to road accidents."
I remind you that the whole exercise was started when you or Catalina quoted some factoid about deaths related to cheating being more than from accidents in airplanes and trains combined. I assume you'll acknowledge that that was a bullshit argument or factoid, as well (misleading, if not untrue).
It would be pleasant if you showed the tiniest bit of positive valence toward the work presented; if you noted that data were presented in an orderly fashion allowing your analysis. If the quarrel whether the ratio is 13 or 16, remains unsettled, I think that's pretty good agreement.
Best,
J.
Added: There is another argument that the 40% you propose is too high. We know that, on some estimates, about 1/3 of married women have cheated. Now that's a cumulative figure, so how many have cheated in a given year? 1/6, 1/10.
But, taking 1/3 for the sake of arguement, as the ones getting killed likely to show a very different percentage? Well, there are two arguments.
You're in effect taking the First: there is *higher* proportion of cheating wifes in those who get killed. These are the adventurous or desperate one that catch the flak.
Second. Among the killed, affairs are less common. Those getting killed have often been abused. They are intimidated and NOT adventurous; they often have histories of being assaulted, which make them careful if not scared.
I lean toward the latter. Hence I'm happy with the 1/4 to 1/5 [of all women murdered in intimate homicide] as an estimate.
Last edited:
