3 comments on “Timmy Elsewhere

  1. D’Amato’s piece on porn and rape is dodgy as hell.

    He first favourably discusses Levitt’s results on the impact of abortion on overall violent crime – and then completely ignores this observed fall in overall violent crime in his analysis of why one particular type of violent crime has fallen.

    If Levitt’s methodology is valid, and additionally there is a correlation between US states with poor Internet access and poor availability of abortion (and a thousand quid says there is – ‘backward hicks’ is the key phrase), then there’s a bloody great “unwanted boys not being born, ignored and abused in the first place” effect going on that has sod-all to do with online boobies.

    Not to mention the impact of higher education levels, and indeed all the other things he mentions and then handwaves. You have to /show/, not just /state/ that they aren’t significant…

    Another possibility is that D’Amato has written a real paper, and the Jurist piece is just a summary. But in its own right, it is significantly less rigorous than a Chris Lightfoot [pbuh] blogpost, and about up there with the sort of thing I occasionally knock out.

    [I know he’s /our/ bastard, and that the anti-porn brigade don’t even bother with data, but really – this is not good methodology…]

  2. There was another experiment in 1967. Denmark went from a complete ban on porn to no restrictions. The number of rapes and other sex crimes dropped by about 50%.

  3. Timeframe? Other demographic factors?

    The whole point is that a study as reported by D’Amato’s article, or ZT’s factoid, is *completely meaningless*.

    We know there is a good “porn cuts rape” story. We also know there is a good “porn encourages rape” story. There may be data which confirms one and refutes the other, but nothing cited so far is it.

Leave a Reply

Name and email are required. Your email address will not be published.