I was just trying to find some actual evidence
Okay, but none of what you claim is evidence is actually evidence.
instead of flatly stating a figure like 40% without attribution.
Attribution: there have been only six studies of the rate of false rape allegations. Three by McDowell, two by Buckley, and one by Kanin. They are consistent and show us that about 40% of women who tell police they have been raped are affirmatively proven to be lying. The actual number of liars is higher. This only includes those proven to be lying. In McDowell's study, half of those coded as liars admitted lying. In Kanin's study ALL of those coded as liars admitted lying. So that's waaaaaay more than 8%
I was reading a couple more articles just now and apparently it's from a study of 109 cases from a single police department where the policy was to uniformly offer victims polygraph tests or something. That doesn't sound very good.
You are describing the Kanin study. Why isn't it good, and why don't you believe the women's own admissions?
a figure as questionable as the 40% one.
There is no basis for questioning the results. I would like to see much more study, but feminist would never allow it. But since all six studies, thousands of cases, are in agreement, what is there to criticize? If feminists think the results are misleading, why don't they repeat the studies?
The FBI one is where I got the figure of 8%. What the report actually says is this: The “unfounded” rate, or percentage of complaints determined through investigation to be false, is higher for forcible rape than for any other Index crime. Eight percent of forcible rape complaints in 1996 were “unfounded,” while the average for all Index crimes was 2 percent.
Unfounded is not the same as false. The FBI collated data from local police departments that doesn't even tell us the rate found to be actual rapes, so we could never say how many were unfounded. These cases were not investigated to determine if they were false. The FBI paper has nothing whatsoever to do with the rate of false allegations and doesn't even claim to have anything to do with the rate of false allegations. It is as relevant as my mom's fried chicken recipe because they both have the word "rape" in them. (My mom fries chicken in rape seed oil).
...so they don't claim to have investigated anything or be reporting on anybody who has, but they're collecting statistics from police departments around the country.
Correct. Police departments almost never investigate to determine if a complaint is false. It would take a long time to fully explain, but I'll hit the highlights. Let's say we have two categories, (1) "Unfounded" and (2) other. First, among the unfounded reports, how many were real rapes, how many erroneous or unproven, and how many hoaxes? We have no idea. Suzy says Jack raped her. Jack has an alibi. Unfounded? Was Suzy raped by someone else? We don't know. So we don't know if this was unfounded. Lucy says Jason raped her. Jason says the sex was consensual. Unfounded? We have no idea. Did sex even take place? Don't know, no category for that. I could go on and on, but you get the idea. These categories don't serve our purpose. They don't mean anything. They don't lead to any conclusion except to evaluate cops, which is what the FBI does. They tell us nothing about whether or not the complaint was a hoax. And the FBI does not claim otherwise.
Next, police investigate to determine if a complaint is TRUE. NOT to determine if it's false. That's why all the data outside the US is useless for our purposes. Nobody has ever done that except the three authors I mentioned. Again, it would take a long time to explain fully. These are the highlights. This is why this is the single most important fact. If you don't do this, you didn't learn anything that can help us. You might have done some police work, you have not done any science.
Fiona says a man raped her with a flashlight at 9 PM Saturday in Hollywood. Police investigate to determine if it's TRUE. Shawn's fingerprints are on the flashlight. They find that at 8:30 Shawn used his ATM card in Toronto. The ATM took his photo. At 9:30 his passport was stamped and he boarded a flight to Miami. Case closed. This is not even "unfounded". Yet we don't know if a rape even took place because the police did not check Fiona's bank records or passport. They did not even attempt to find out if they complaint was FALSE. They simply failed to prove it was true. If they had investigated to determine if the claim was FALSE, they would have found that Fiona used her ATM card in Seattle at 8:30, then drove across the border to Vancouver. This case is a HOAX, but in the FBI paper, it's not even unfounded. It's considered an actual rape with no suspect. Get it?
That number might be low-balling it but it's got more basis than a study of 109 cases.
The six studies together are thousands of cases in, I think, nine locations over years- urban, small town, military, college.
The Rumney study is a pretty thorough investigation of false rape allegations in multiple jurisdictions and reports on the rate at which rape allegations were dismissed and the reasons for it,
It is NOT a study of FALSE rape allegations. It is a study of DISMISSED rape allegations. It does not investigate any rapes to determine if they are false, and tells us nothing about the rate of lies. It is a study of COPS, not rape complaints. It does not claim that cases that were dismissed were actual rapes, or that dismissed cases were not. It's fried chicken. I'm sure it's a useful tool for evaluating cops. It's not designed to evaluate rape complaints.
and it pretty strongly contradicts your claim of 40%.
It doesn't contradict my claim because it doesn't speak to my claim. It is silent on my claim.
So it's the same as the FBI report in relying on numbers provided by police departments.
Yes, they are both fried chicken. They both rely on numbers provided by cops, but cops DO NOT provide the number of false rape allegations. Cops don't even know the number. Cops don't even know if Fiona was raped at all.
I don't think there are going to be any statistically reliable studies which fit the criteria you seem to have, where investigators would actually look into individual cases and attempt to determine whether the allegation was false or not.
I cited six of them.
That'd be such an intensive undertaking and I mean how would somebody get access to witnesses and get ethical approval for anything like that, and how would they be able to get anything like enough numbers to be statistically significant? You couldn't get a random sample or anything like that.
It was a huge undertaking. They got a random sample by examining ALL the complaints in a given time period. They did not take a sample, really, they took the entire poplulation. In Kanin's case, he didn't need witnesses, the women admitted lying. In McDowell and Buckley's studies, they had the record of what witnesses told cops. So they could not follow up with more questions (sometimes). That only means the actual number of false rape accusations is HIGHER than the 40% PROVEN false rape accusations.
the RPE statistics was that they show how many rapes go unreported, not how many false rape claims there are
We don't know the number of unreported rapes because we don't investigate the claims to determine if there was any rape. We just believe that if a woman says she was raped then she was. You have now seen how dangerous this is because so many women lie. Since you are more familiar with the paper than I am, I urge you do a favor for me (it will help you also). Can you find the survey instrument? I have not seen it, but I have seen many others. I'll bet this one, like all those I have seen, is deliberately designed to code women who have never been raped as rape victims. If you can find the instrument, I'll show you. You might decide to throw the source away because you have confidence you're being lied to. You might change the results of your project.
That makes me wonder, do you think false rape claims are a bigger problem than unreported cases of rape?
I don't know. I don't know how many unreported rapes there are. I don't think anyone does. If unreported rapes are a bigger problem, it does not diminish the problem of terrorizing men with false allegations. If the US killed 200,000 innocent people in Iraq, it is no less a tragedy that we killed 50,000 innocent people in Afghanistan.
Let me give you an example. (The numbers are for illustration.). Until a couple of years ago, the US government told us 20% of women and no men were raped in college. (Obama just said this!). Then we found out that it wasn't 20% of women, it was a small fraction of ONE PERCENT! And then we found out that it wasn't zero men being raped, BECAUSE WE FORGOT TO ASK MEN IF THEY WERE RAPED! Then we found out that likely more men are raped in the US than women. Then we found out that when we asked women if they were sexually assaulted, we included men begging or nagging! As sexual assault! Then we found out that the number of unreported rapes was DOUBLE what we said before! Except it's HALF! And this is just the last three or so years. So how the fuck do I know how big the problem is? All I know is that anyone that says they know is full of shit. I urge you to please be careful thinking that just because you found a statistic on a website, even if it's from oxford, that you found the answer. I hope you know no that with respect to false accusations, the answers can be misleading. The same is true of unreported rapes.