Lifetime domestic violence rates among men, even adjusting for unreported events, is around half that of women.
That means that the answer to “why is my wife yelling at me?” is about half as likely to be “domestic abuse” than it is for “why is my husband yelling at me?”
Context is crucial for establishing double standards.
Usually by using the most generous estimates that come from looking at the statistical differences between stats like actual reports and results from anonymous studies, that’s just 2 examples, I’m sure staticians use way more data, and then turn that into “for every reported x, there’s y unreported” then you just apply the pre-algebra and compare the adjusted number to which ever stat for women (the unfair answer here is then not adjusting for unreported in women, which would probably be a lower number than men but still)
They’re absolutely relevant when you’re talking about building a user interface for billions of people. You could put a domestic abuse warning on every single search result page, or you could put it on no pages, or you could put it on a subset of all results; and when you’re already putting it on a subset of all results, you’re making a decision as to which queries to exclude it from, which means you need statistics to decide which pages need it the most.
Your second sentence does not follow logically from your first though.
A randomly selected male might be half as likely as a randomly selected woman to be a victim of domestic violence, but what a man in the far smaller set of people who have googled that particular phrase?
I would venture to say the ratio might be a lot closer
You may be right (and that’s a thing I hadn’t considered, thank you!) but I worry that getting it wrong means you’re adding to noise and masking the message underneath a veneer of familiarity (how many compulsive gamblers see the “Gambling problem?” message at the bottom of casino billboards? How many smokers read the surgeon general’s warning?).
To get that calibrated correctly, you’d need some research; but the data on why a person searches a particular search term is definitely going to be skewed in this instance by a flood of people searching these two terms to compare the results.
Based on the statistics I could find, the domestic abuse victim numbers seem to be about 45/55% men/women. Exact statistics will differ based on your local area, of course.
Physical violence is reported much rarer by men than women (physical strength helps a lot here) but I don’t see why you would need to be seriously hurt to get help from a help line.
Lifetime domestic violence rates among men, even adjusting for unreported events, is around half that of women.
That means that the answer to “why is my wife yelling at me?” is about half as likely to be “domestic abuse” than it is for “why is my husband yelling at me?”
Context is crucial for establishing double standards.
Question how does one adjust for ‘unreported events’. It’d be like 50% of the universe is female when adjusting for Alien Life forms.
Usually by using the most generous estimates that come from looking at the statistical differences between stats like actual reports and results from anonymous studies, that’s just 2 examples, I’m sure staticians use way more data, and then turn that into “for every reported x, there’s y unreported” then you just apply the pre-algebra and compare the adjusted number to which ever stat for women (the unfair answer here is then not adjusting for unreported in women, which would probably be a lower number than men but still)
Look. For any given person, their domestic violence rate is either zero, or one.
Statistics aren’t the end of the story here, or even relevant honestly.
They’re absolutely relevant when you’re talking about building a user interface for billions of people. You could put a domestic abuse warning on every single search result page, or you could put it on no pages, or you could put it on a subset of all results; and when you’re already putting it on a subset of all results, you’re making a decision as to which queries to exclude it from, which means you need statistics to decide which pages need it the most.
Your second sentence does not follow logically from your first though. A randomly selected male might be half as likely as a randomly selected woman to be a victim of domestic violence, but what a man in the far smaller set of people who have googled that particular phrase? I would venture to say the ratio might be a lot closer
You may be right (and that’s a thing I hadn’t considered, thank you!) but I worry that getting it wrong means you’re adding to noise and masking the message underneath a veneer of familiarity (how many compulsive gamblers see the “Gambling problem?” message at the bottom of casino billboards? How many smokers read the surgeon general’s warning?).
To get that calibrated correctly, you’d need some research; but the data on why a person searches a particular search term is definitely going to be skewed in this instance by a flood of people searching these two terms to compare the results.
Based on the statistics I could find, the domestic abuse victim numbers seem to be about 45/55% men/women. Exact statistics will differ based on your local area, of course.
Physical violence is reported much rarer by men than women (physical strength helps a lot here) but I don’t see why you would need to be seriously hurt to get help from a help line.