this post was submitted on 21 Apr 2026
1676 points (99.6% liked)
Political Memes
11722 readers
2237 users here now
Welcome to politcal memes!
These are our rules:
1) Be civil
Jokes are okay, but don’t intentionally harass or disturb any member of our community. Sexism, racism and bigotry are not allowed. Good faith argumentation only. No posts discouraging people to vote or shaming people for voting.
2) No misinformation
Don’t post any intentional misinformation. When asked by mods, provide sources for any claims you make.
3) Posts should be memes
Random pictures do not qualify as memes. Relevance to politics is required.
4) No bots, spam or self-promotion
Follow instance rules, ask for your bot to be allowed on this community.
5) No AI generated content.
Content posted must not be created by AI with the intent to mimic the style of existing images
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
That does NOT say what you're implying. At no point in his post does he say anything was fixed or solved. That says the 30 year old data was representative at the time, not necessarily that it represents things now. Many things have changed in 30 years. 30 years ago the World Wide Web basically didn't exist, and what little did exist was small and accessed primarily via dial-up. Hell, HTML was created in 1993, 33 years ago. That's the time frame we're talking about here.
Your reading comprehension is lacking if you think simply pointing out that many things have changed in 30 years and that using data that old without any new data to compare it to inherently means that we "fixed" something. That's your assumption based on a few sentences that literally say none of that.
Are you trying to say that society hasn't changed at all since the beginning of the World Wide Web? That someone saying that specific data that old may not be accurate to current society anymore?
Exactly.
The most relevant data I can provide is the mean age of motherhood: the age of a woman when she has her first child.
The lowest age I can find was in the 1970s. It was probably lower in earlier decades, but the available data doesn't support it. In the 1970's, the mean age of motherhood was only 20.2 years.
**The average age of first conception was 19.5 years. The average woman was 6 months pregnant on her 20th birthday. More women were pregnant in their teens than not. **
That is a quantifiable statistic, and it is a bleak one. Fortunately, the mean age of motherhood has risen to 27.5 years, and is climbing rapidly.
The data in question is not quantifiable. From what was posted, we can determine the relative difference in the ages of rapists and their victims, but we cannot determine their actual ages. We don't know from this data if the ages in the typical case of 10-years difference were 19 and 29, or 9 and 19. From this questionable data, We can't even determine the prevalence. This data might be based on 6 cases, 60 cases, or 60 million cases. We cannot determine the scale of the problem from this data.
The rapidly rising age of motherhood tells me that however "bleak" the problem was when this data was compiled, the current scale of the problem is considerably less "bleak". That doesn't mean the problem has been solved, but it is certainly trending away from the problem and not toward it.
Do you know the difference between the words "is" and "was"?
Do you?
"Is" refers to the current state. "Was" refers to a previous state. In the context of "data from 1989 describing the relative difference in ages between pregnant teenage rape victims and their attackers", should we be using "is bleak" or "was bleak"?
Does this data describe anything at all about the current state? Or is this data limited solely to a previous state?
In answering, keep in mind that I provided "age of motherhood" data, indicating considerable changes have occurred since the 1989 data was tabulated.
I wasn't asking you? Are you mixing up your real account and your fake cheerleader account?
Ah, it must be someone posting on multiple accounts! There couldn't possibly be more than one person pointing out your seemingly limited reading comprehension in response to your posts in a public space.
To answer your original question, yes I do understand how time works and the difference in present and past tense, something you're clearly forgetting exists. Or maybe you're ignoring that to try and justify your previous comments to yourself because you can't accept you were wrong.
You posted from the wrong account again. ;-)
It is possible they multiple people disagree with you. Extremely likely in fact.
Especially given your proven inability to read.