“Men are afraid that women will laugh at them. Women are afraid that men will kill them.

[Mc Mike]

49. It's fair to say we're not on the same page.

Last edited Tue Oct 4, 2016, 08:12 AM - Edit history (2)

Deaths/year, spiders and snakes:

"...To that end, I gathered the statistics on animal-caused fatalities in the U.S. ... as snakes (6 deaths per year) and spiders (7 deaths per year).
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2015/06/16/chart-the-animals-that-are-most-likely-to-kill-you-this-summer/ "

Deaths/day, women killed by current or former male partner:

"3 The number of women murdered every day by a current or former male partner in the U.S." ... "1,509 The number of women murdered by men they knew in 2011. Of the 1,509 women, 926 were killed by an intimate parter and 264 of those were killed by an intimate partner during an argument."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2014/10/23/domestic-violence-statistics_n_5959776.html

I'm not "so fond of" those actuarial stats, but they exist nonetheless. Deaths from the latter cause are 215 X greater than deaths from the former. There's a 21,400% increased likelihood that a woman would be killed by a guy she knew, as opposed to being killed by a spider about which she may have a phobia.

Only 4 (or 3) out of a hundred young to middle aged women who die actually get murdered by men, so we can dismiss that with a piously mouthed 8 word statement, and move on to talking about how it's worse for men. Your 4% stat is a bit odd, what's the source? My CDC source says that premature deaths by homicide are 4.5% of the total number, for Females aged 10 -14, 8% for ages 15 -19 and 20 -24, 5% for 25 -34, then down to 2.2% for 35 -44. There's a 5.8 % average chance of homicide being listed as cause of death, across the 15 - 44 age groups. Not 3 or 4, close to 6 out of a hundred.
http://www.cdc.gov/women/lcod/2011/WomenAll_2011.pdf

(The corresponding numbers for males are 6, 19, 18, 11, 5 %, across the 5 age groups, but that's overwhelmingly men killing men, and this o.p. was about women and mens' relationships to each other, and how they'd like not to be killed, please, whether or not they rudely laughed at someone. So you're probably better off making the point that men are the real victims here in a separate o.p., because it's off topic here.)

Homicide is the 6th highest ranked cause of death for girls 10 - 14, 4th highest for girls and women aged 15 -19, 4th for 20 -24, 5th for 25 -34, and 8th for 35 -44. The higher ranked causes of death, in all of those age groups, vary. The higher ranked causes include suicide, cancer, heart disease and other diseases, and the catch-all "unintentional injuries" designation, which would include car wrecks, falls, skiing accidents, hunting accidents, surgical error, etc., you name it.

Almost nobody in existence stays huddled in their room quivering with fear, waiting for that final moment they just know is coming. John Candy did a funny SCTV sketch, that took the form of an ad for an upcoming Western TV series featuring the title character "Yellowbelly". Candy goes around a late 1800's western town dressed up like a gunfighter, cringing and snivelling in fear with every interaction he has with all the other townspeople. Nobody does that in reality. It was amusing to watch, but nobody actually operates day to day in that caricaturized manner John Candy and you have imagined.

Nobody has a deep specific justified fear of becoming a victim of all "unintentional injuries" combined. Being afraid of all of them combined would be like being afraid of being killed like Rasputin, by being shot, stabbed, bludgeoned, strangled, poisoned, tossed out the window, and drowned, all in a couple hours. People that commit suicide can't justifiably state that their greatest archetypal fear is that they'll die by suicide. People are specifically afraid of cancer and heart disease, and other diseases, so they strategize and act to eat right, avoid unhealthy activities, hope for medical advances and contribute to causes to combat those diseases. People advocate "stop smoking, don't do drugs, don't drive drunk", etc. to fight against all those higher ranked deaths.

Then we come to that 4th or 5th ranked cause of death. That's the one where the girl or woman eats right, has a perfectly healthy body, dodged falling victim to some disease she irrationally feared more than necessary, avoided every one of the myriad possible low percentage occurrance of accidents and mischances that could be fatal, and didn't act on feelings of suicidal depression. They dodged all those bullets that caused the higher ranked 63 out of every hundred early womens' deaths. Now 6 of them are going to be killed. They're completely innocent, it's an illegal felony, it's non-standard atypical behavior that's frowned upon and could be prevented and avoided. Murder adds another 10% to the death totals attributable to the first through third highest ranked death causes.

As a way of combatting these avoidable archetypally typical deaths, coming to terms mentally and intellectually with them, strategizing over tactics and discussiong them, an intelligent thinker defined this large scale threatening phenomenon with a well-thought out, deeply true statement about a fundamentally characteristic innate universal prototype. You say, "ah, it's only 3 or 4 %" "of course even one death is too many" "so let's stop talking about it and talk about men". A counter to your 8 word dismissal, that you thinly disguised as a concession or admission, is "as a strategy, discussing this archetype is justified."

And that's just violent murders. You realize, of course, that Sandra Fluke was trying to testify to the repug congressional experts about life and death womens' health issues. Millions of intellectually and morally unsound Americans put those repugs into office, and millions subscribe to the intellectually and morally unsound philosophies that rightie fundy "christians" pushed to cause the "red meat for the base" empanelment of the all-male womens' health "expert" panel the repugs convened, to which Fluke tried to offer testimony. All she was saying was that Georgetown is a tax-free Catholic institution that depends on tax-dollar subsidies, and there are life threatening health issues like ovarian cysts and endometriosis which are treated by birth control pills. So the pill should be covered as part of the health plan, despite the "moral" objections of whiny freeloading religious zealot groups.

The results of Fluke's efforts were that Limbaugh attacked her over and over again in national media broadcasts with every type of "loose woman" slur he could broadcast. He pretended that he didn't even know how the pill works, pretended that he thought a woman has to take one birth control pill each time before she has sex, so covering the drug for those nymphos would cost so much money. He had to tell the most outrageously dimwitted lie, in order to back the "womens' health experts" in the gop. Keep in mind that the same guy not only got caught out as a oxycontin prescription abusing criminal drug addict, but also got caught and detained by customs when returning from the Dominican Republic with unlawfully possessed prescription Viagra.

All Sandra was saying was "It would be nice if women didn't have to die because of your 'morals'." The people she was talking to were fundy "christians", rightwing nut repugs, and that bloated swine nazi propagandist. None of those deaths due to denied medical access fit into the category of "women killed by men", of course, but the nexus of fundies, repugs, and propagandists involved in that Fluke case perfectly epitomizes the target of the archetypal statement Atwood made.

Those creeps only get away with these hateful murderous attacks because a big chunk of the population doesn't adequately do anything to oppose or call them out for it. They're "not on board" with that bad archetype but don't care enough to oppose it, and so hold a candle to it continuing to progress in its attacks. That means that essentially, fundamentally, they are on board with it. You aren't on board with them, and despise them? Beautiful. Now, though you have free time, because you're not busy attacking those archetypal bad guys, how about putting a hold on your "rhetorical philosophic realpolitik-al reality-based" opposition to the people who are attacking that archetype and those archetypal badguys.

Do you know what Ivana was thinking when that orange nazi turd, that millions of repugs are trying to put in charge of our country, was violently sexually assaulting her, aki? I couldn't figure out if you did, from your response. Of course, she isn't part of your "3 or 4%", or the CDC's 5.8%.