Unfortunately that's only in Finnish, but here are some key words:
- "Suomen kansalaiset" = "Finnish citizens".
- "Venäjä, entinen Neuvostoliitto" = "Russia, former Soviet Union"
- "Raiskausrikokset" = "Rape (-crimes)"
Then, take the year 2011 for example.
2011
- Total number of rapes: 644
- Total number of rapes committed by Finns: 474
- Total number of rapes committed by all foreigners: 170
- Total number of rapes committed by Estonians: 15
- Total number of rapes committed by *Russians*: 3
- Total number of rapes committed by Swedes: 3
- Total number of rapes committed by *Other Foreigners: 149*
Other than Estonians and Russians, there were 13 other language groups listed.
Let's be "generous" and assume they account for 3 rapes each, much like Russians and Swedes, even though they're much smaller minorities so the numbers are probably much lower.
That leaves us with 110 rapes committed by Somalis. Now I'm no statistician, and not very good at math either. But when Somalis outnumber a much larger minority in rape statistics 110 to 3, it seems that they're pretty fucking Rapey.
Woah woah woah. Slow down there, you're trying to take a flying leap across a giant statistical chasm.
The logic here is so bad I'm not sure where to start.
There's a very bad assumption here, which is that the "other foreigners" category contains only the 13 groups listed, and that membership in none of the others implies membership in the Somalis group.
In other words, what you're saying is, in government statistics re: rape, everyone in the "other nationality" category is Somali unless they can be attributed to 12 other ethnic groups. This seems specious at best, horrifying twisting of fact at worst.
Do you have any evidence that this is what the data says? Or are you reading this out of the data due to your own preexisting prejudices? I'm starting to see what _delirium is describing re: European racism.
In other news, there are 100 cars in the parking lot outside. There are 2 Toyotas, 3 Hondas, and 95 "other" cars. Clearly these 95 cars are Fords.
[edit] Also need to address this:
> "Let's be "generous" and assume they account for 3 rapes each, much like Russians and Swedes, even though they're much smaller minorities so the numbers are probably much lower."
You can't do this with stats and still claim to remain impartial, or correct. You're trying to use numbers to give legitimacy to your claims, yet right in the middle of the argument you inject huge assumptions with no attempt at even making an educated guess.
The moment the words "probably" and "let's be generous" come out of your mouth re: statistics, your numbers have lost almost all meaning. When you're trying to justify incredibly racist views, back of the napkin calculations do not cut it.
Let me be frank: GP was skeptical of your claims and asked for substantiation, you have provided numbers that in no way substantiates your claims, and are incredibly vague and full of bad assumptions made in bad faith.
I rarely accuse people directly on these forums. You sir, are racist. For the sake of all of us, please re-evaluate your views.
As I said, I'm no statistician. I can't do science, and I can't do statistics. But that doesn't matter with regard to what I was pointing out.
There's a very bad assumption here, which is that the "other foreigners" category contains only the 13 groups listed, and that membership in none of the others implies membership in the Somalis group.
Assuming I'm not even pretending to "do statistics" (as a science), and that I'm not even trying to be "rigorous" about it, why is that a bad assumption?
Why would it not be reasonable to assume that if a minority is not on that list, it's an insignificant one?
Why would membership in none of the others not imply membership in the Somalis group?
Again, there's no need to be rigorous here. It's actually common knowledge here in Finland that Somalis rape a lot of women, but I felt like I should point to some statistics instead of just making that claim right away. Otherwise a cold reception like this would have been guaranteed.
It's common knowledge in Sweden too, by the way. In Germany, it's the Turks, and in the Netherlands, it's Moroccans.
There are people who are aware of reality, and then there are Sheeple, and for whatever reason, the media here (and afaik, all over the countries affected by Muslim immigration) has been systematically covering up the fact that the perpetrators of lots of crimes are, in fact Somalis, and not Finns.
Whenever there's news of a gang-rape, they always say it's was a bunch of "younglings" (="nuorukaiset" in Finnish, "ungdomar" in Swedish, "youth" in English news). Without any mention of the ethnicity, the reader will just assume it was locals who did it. Actually, I'm surprised they even publish statistics like those I pointed to.
Seriously. How rare is gang-rape among Western men? It's pretty fucking rare. But there have been lots of incidents in Finland in the past years. Does it make sense to assume that Finns have suddenly gotten all gang-rapey?
In other news, there are 100 cars in the parking lot outside. There are 2 Toyotas, 3 Hondas, and 95 "other" cars. Clearly these 95 cars are Fords.
Well, if we know that those 100 cars consist of Toyotas, Hondas, and Fords, and that 2 are Toyotas and 3 are Hondas, what does that leave us with for the 95 "Others"?
You can't do this with stats and still claim to remain impartial, or correct.
Again, I never claimed to be rigorous with my stats. That's just an assumption by you.
The moment the words "probably" and "let's be generous" come out of your mouth re: statistics, your numbers have lost almost all meaning. When you're trying to justify incredibly racist views, back of the napkin calculations do not cut it.
Again, not rigorous. Besides, there was no need to be rigorous. The conclusion is very clear even with a large error margin. Even 110 to 3 is a massive difference, but as I pointed out, it's reasonable to assume that the smallest minorities don't actually count for 3 rapes each, but less.
I rarely accuse people directly on these forums. You sir, are racist. For the sake of all of us, please re-evaluate your views.
I can see how you'd reach that conclusion, especially since it was what you wanted to conclude all along. But really, Europe does have a Muslim immigration problem. There's no problem with Chinese immigrants, or Western ones, or anyone who comes in and adapts and doesn't cause trouble.
But there sure as hell is a problem with Somalis, in both Finland and Sweden. We're all brainwashed by our Western cultures in to viewing the world through rose-colored glasses, but that's not what reality is like.
> "As I said, I'm no statistician. I can't do science, and I can't do statistics. But that doesn't matter with regard to what I was pointing out."
It absolutely does. If you do not have the (sound, defensible) numbers to point it out, what you have are personal anecdotes, not evidence.
So in other words, you believe Somalis rape 34x more than the general population, but you don't actually have proof of it. The fact that you would readily believe that one group rapes a whole 34x more than another group, without skepticism or wanting to verify the facts, reveals a great deal about what you wish to believe.
I highly recommend reading up on statistics, and looking at more stats in general (and not just in relation to crime). When you see a stat like "group A commits crime THIRTY FOUR TIMES more than group B", your skepticism alarm needs to go off. It isn't impossible, but it's also so unlikely demographics-wise that it bears extreme skepticism and checking.
For example, if you look at the very worst neighborhoods in the very worst cities of the US and compare their crime rates to the very best urban areas, the crime rate difference is usually not more than 4-5x. THIRTY FOUR times is such an extreme outlier that frankly I'm shocked you were not skeptical about it.
> "Why would it not be reasonable to assume that if a minority is not on that list, it's an insignificant one?"
Because insignificant numbers accumulate. How many "other" nationalities do you think there exists in your country? There are 130+ countries in existence right now - even if they each contribute very little to your rape statistics, that's a lot of accumulated crime.
You cannot ignore variables unless you have very good reason to. No group can be claimed "insignificant" without reason, not if you want to be anywhere close to impartial and correct.
What you need is the real breakdown of the "others" category, not an inferred one subject to your own biases.
And here's a little riddle for you: if the stats here are organized by significance (see how significant contributing nationalities are separated out?), why aren't the Somalis separated out? You would think that a rate over 34x more than the general population, contributing to a huge portion of rapes in the country, would bear its own column, no?
Your reasoning is specious.
> "Why would membership in none of the others not imply membership in the Somalis group?"
Okay. I've tried to remain civil, but your ignorance and lack of knowledge is so poisonous, and supports a view so vicious, that I cannot.
NO. FOR THE LOVE OF FUCKING GOD READ A BOOK. Educate yourself before making stupid statements up like this.
Do you really believe that in the entire country of Finland there are only thirteen non-Finnish nationalities represented?
Here's a simpler example. There's a parking lot outside with 100 cars. 3 of them are Toyota, 2 of them are Honda, and 95 are "other". In the "other" category there are 5 Chryslers and 5 Fiats.
What you are saying is that this means we have 85 Fords - even though nothing in the data suggests that my breakdown of the "others" is even remotely close to comprehensive - you've assumed that, and conveniently forget that there are more car brands in the world than Toyota, Honda, Chrysler, Fiat, and Ford.
Do you start to understand?
> "It's actually common knowledge here in Finland that Somalis rape a lot of women"
Yet where is your proof? You have offered ZERO evidence. You would think that if Somalis really raped women at a rate OVER THIRTY TIMES the national average, that you can find some iota of evidence? You would think that this would appear as a distinct column in your stats - after all, it points out much smaller national groups!
This is nothing more than your own prejudice and the prejudice of people who share your "common knowledge".
> "It's common knowledge in Sweden too, by the way. In Germany, it's the Turks, and in the Netherlands, it's Moroccans."
This is depressing. You are so blatantly racist but somehow you don't see it for yourself.
What's next. It's common knowledge in Germany too, it's actually the Jews?
This sort of "common knowledge" that can't seem to be backed up by fact (and what you offered is so far from fact I'm not sure what to say) is the most blatant, vicious form of racism. This casual belief that "well of COURSE group A rapes 34x more than everyone else, everyone knows that", yet with no evidence of it. The willingness to believe shocking, mind-boggling things without seeking the slightest shred of proof!
This whole conversation is sickening.
> "There are people who are aware of reality, and then there are Sheeple"
Ahh, I see how this works now. You've chosen to believe something so outrageous that it staggers belief, with no proof whatsoever. The only way you can defend this position is if you convince yourself anyone who disagrees is controlled by the government/media and are "sheeple".
You sir, are the worst kind of racist.
> "Without any mention of the ethnicity, the reader will just assume it was locals who did it."
And you will assume it's Somalis, right? Do you see what you just did yourself?
> "Again, I never claimed to be rigorous with my stats. That's just an assumption by you."
THEN YOU HAVE NO PROOF OR EVIDENCE WHATSOEVER.
What you are saying: "I'm completely making up these numbers to support my world view, I've never claimed these numbers are correct. BUT LOOK AT THEM, THEY REVEAL THE TRUTH ABOUT THE SOMALIS"
So here's what you really must own up to: your beliefs are your own but they are not supported by evidence or reason. You are entitled to your beliefs, however wrong and racist they may be, but do not claim to have evidence for it unless you actually do.
I came into this reply thinking maybe I had you wrong, maybe this is just a gross miscommunication and exercise in statistical awfulness. But no, you are far more racist than I even suspected. For the love of God I hope we never meet.
Sweet merciful [insert all deities here]... You've just completely ruined my morning. You are by far the most racist person I've ever conversed with, and I've seen some racist shit on this side of the ocean. The fact that people like you exist makes me depressed.
You, sir, are an ENRAGED SHEEP, and as such, it's difficult to discuss reality with you when you're hell-bent on rejecting it.
> If you do not have the (sound, defensible) numbers to point it out, what you have are personal anecdotes, not evidence.
You're still stuck on the numbers, and the lack of "statistical rigor" in the way I used them. Fine, let's just forget about the numbers.
As I already mentioned, the fact of the matter is that every non-sheep Finn KNOWS that Somalis rape women. It's just the way it is. We KNOW that the media tries to cover up the fact that Somalis are most often the perpetrators in cases of rape. We KNOW that whenever a bunch of "Younglings" gang-raped a woman, it was Somalis.
What would you expect from a culture that considers women men's property? They believe that if a woman is showing too much skin, she's asking to get raped. I heard this first-hand from a Pakistani colleague I befriended back when I was still a sheep too. Not only that, but if she wants anyone to get convicted, she needs four pious Muslim MEN as witnesses for the rape, and if she goes to the police station to complain about getting raped, the police may just decide to rape her too, just for funzies (or because she's "filthy" or whatever the official, Islam-sanctioned excuse was). Yeah. Not every single goddamn time, but it does happen.
It's just obvious that Muslims are more rapey than your average white Westerner (or any other non-Muslim).
Now, at this point, feel free to howl about "painting with a broad brush" or how Not All Of Them (tm) rape women, and so on. Not ALL of them bury their daughters alive for showing too much skin. No, but it constitutes a noteworthy phenomenon, and the observation can be made that Muslims are a group of people who do that (to whatever relatively-small-but-nevertheless-fucking-insane extent it happens).
So in other words, you believe Somalis rape 34x more than the general population, but you don't actually have proof of it. The fact that you would readily believe that one group rapes a whole 34x more than another group, without skepticism or wanting to verify the facts, reveals a great deal about what you wish to believe.
Yes, I'm willing to believe a factor of 34. But even if my "estimate" is wrong by half, it's still a massive factor of 17. Would you believe I was off by half? Even if we discounted a huge mistake like being off by 50%, it would still leave a massive factor of over-representation.
Again, it's just a fact that they are more rapey than non-Muslims. I can't just whip out proof for that claim, because rapes by Somalis specifically are not listed (even though they are for those handful of other groups) in those statistics. Not only that, but the media censorship of Somali rapes kind of gets in the way of proving anything.
And here's a little riddle for you: if the stats here are organized by significance (see how significant contributing nationalities are separated out?), why aren't the Somalis separated out? You would think that a rate over 34x more than the general population, contributing to a huge portion of rapes in the country, would bear its own column, no?
Here's another right back at you: If our government instructs our media to cover up Somalis' crimes, do you think they'd just give us the statistics that would make them blindingly obvious?
Can I personally prove the censorship to you right now? No, not really. But I KNOW it happens. You can't hinge everything on proof that is - or would be - provided by a government. All governments lie to their little tax cows. You want proof of that? Well, you can't have it.
You know, I used to be an innocent, well-meaning sheep like you. I used to be quite enthusiastic about the idea that we're all equal and we're all "the same" and that we should all just live together in peace and harmony, but then, gradually, I was faced with Reality, and had to adjust my views on things. That's the thing. You need to be capable of adjusting your views on things whenever the need arises.
But it's in our nature as human beings to reject any changes, cling to our preconceived notions and dislike/resent anything that represents Otherness. Because of that, different races just aren't destined to get along. Saying that doesn't mean I hate black people just for being black, it means I'm aware of this particular aspect of reality.
> Do you really believe that in the entire country of Finland there are only thirteen non-Finnish nationalities represented?
How well do you know Finland? -Not particularly, obviously. Do you have any idea how homogenous our population still is? Before 1990, there weren't any Somalis here.
So when the chart I originally posted says: "The largest groups by native language 2001 and 2011", there's no reason to interpret it as: "The largest groups by native language 2001 and 2011 (EXCEPT FOR LOTS OF OTHER PEOPLE WE LEFT OUT)"
Yet where is your proof? You have offered ZERO evidence. You would think that if Somalis really raped women at a rate OVER THIRTY TIMES the national average, that you can find some iota of evidence? You would think that this would appear as a distinct column in your stats - after all, it points out much smaller national groups!
You just keep yammering on and on about evidence.
Here's an idea: You should vote for Obama because he's The Good Guy, and Romney is The Bad Guy. You want The Good Guy to win, right?
Here's another: Your country's real, actual unemployment rate is 7.9%. (Do you think you can prove this by pointing to BLS statistics? --> http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EbfttPAj66k )
The massive bank bailouts and "stimulus" ever since 2008 have helped, and your economy is now on the path to prosperity!
Spain doesn't need a bailout! After all, Mr. Rajoy told us so!
You're free to believe all of that, but if you do, you are a clueless sheep. Most people in the world are, of course, and it's not your fault - you've been brainwashed into it, after all. But it is your mission, should you choose to accept it, to start seeing and accepting Reality for what it is.
Or, you could just keep on raging and bleating angrily at anyone who says anything that goes against your Rainbows & Unicorns view of the world.
> in 2005, persons of Romani background (who make up less than 0.2% of the total population of Finland[1]) perpetrated 18% of solved street robbery crimes in Finland
So a group of people that represents 0.2% of the population perpetrated 18% of the street robberies in Finland. Want proof of that? I haven't got any, but having lived all my life in Finland, it's very easy for me to believe it. This is a group of people that performs the vast majority of shoplifting too. I can't cite any statistics for that either, but I've personally seen them wander around a department store, just picking stuff up and putting it into their pockets. Want proof of that? Sorry, I don't have the security camera footage. But this is yet another thing that's common knowledge in Finland, and this time even Sheeple would agree, with a sheepish grin on their faces.
Now, here's something you should think about really fucking hard: Is it RACIST to point this stuff out? Or is it, you know, just.. describing Reality? But whenever someone describes a part of reality you're not comfortable with, you label them racist or whatever-ist and then proceed to rage at them.
> - by way of comparison, Somalis were responsible for 12%, while ethnic Finns were close to 51%.
Well well well, who do we have here? So Somalis commit 12% of all street robberies in Finland? But.. but.. they're such a lovely and upstanding group of model citizens! That simply CAN'T be true!
But no, you are far more racist than I even suspected. For the love of God I hope we never meet.
Ah, because then you'd just HAVE to beat me into a bloody pulp in the name of Justice! Right?
That's sweet. I hope we never meet too. Who knows, maybe I'm a filthy misogynist too, so beating me into a pulp just wouldn't suffice - you'd have to straight up kill me.
All in the name of Righteousness and Justice, of course. Killing me would be your civic duty as a Good Person.
You are by far the most racist person I've ever conversed with, and I've seen some racist shit on this side of the ocean. The fact that people like you exist makes me depressed.
Well, Mr. White Knight, you just might be the most enraged sheep I've ever conversed with. I guess that makes us even. You know, there are actually people on Hacker News that live in reality. Sometimes you even see them speak about it, and somehow miraculously not get downvoted into oblivion by a herd of enraged sheeple, so I thought some of that might have rubbed off on you. Apparently I was wrong.
You can't assume that other foreigners are somalis. It wouldn't make sense if they were either, because why would they single out estonians and russians, but not somalis?
This is a gross error that might fly on another board, but you are totally wrong, and a racist to boot! Downvoted.
