This is a thoroughly useless graph (and post). No comparison to the population of each state, no comparison to numbers of men being killed by women. It's subpar even for an Imp post. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
Dude, post the stats for men. It's not that fucking hard. If the stats for men are also "a rounding error" then your fear would also be irrational, right?
Imp, you're the one missing the point. These numbers in a vacuum mean nothing. Are these trending up or down, are they higher or lower than the stats for men, does the stat change significantly when accounting for situations with multiple victims?
You've told us nothing but you're convinced you've disproven some big feminist point.
You aren't using the complete numbers, either. Homicides committed by multiple or unknown perpetrators - like the Jack the Ripper killings - would be omitted from these statistics.
TX and CA... Is it Mexicans? The next highest southern border state is AZ at #14, but I can't think of what could cause the numbers to be so drastically high for those two states above all the others.
Good thing we have your unbiased speculation, because without per capita and male/female comparisons the rest of us have no way to judge these numbers.
Edit: it's amazing how feminists are generally numerically illiterate, but you still manage to be as wrong as they are.
This is a thoroughly useless graph (and post). No comparison to the population of each state, no comparison to numbers of men being killed by women. It's subpar even for an Imp post. I award you no points, and may God have mercy on your soul.
No it fucking doesn't. It shows that number of women murdered is small, without showing that the number of men murdered is significantly larger.
Unless there are 10x the number of men being murdered this graph is fucking pointless.
Buddy, you have to compare shit to get your point across.
Dude, post the stats for men. It's not that fucking hard. If the stats for men are also "a rounding error" then your fear would also be irrational, right?
Imp, you're the one missing the point. These numbers in a vacuum mean nothing. Are these trending up or down, are they higher or lower than the stats for men, does the stat change significantly when accounting for situations with multiple victims?
You've told us nothing but you're convinced you've disproven some big feminist point.
You aren't using the complete numbers, either. Homicides committed by multiple or unknown perpetrators - like the Jack the Ripper killings - would be omitted from these statistics.
The way women work is if 1 woman is killed and 100000 men are killed, the women will still think the 1 woman killed is a bigger tragedy.
TX and CA... Is it Mexicans? The next highest southern border state is AZ at #14, but I can't think of what could cause the numbers to be so drastically high for those two states above all the others.
Good thing we have your unbiased speculation, because without per capita and male/female comparisons the rest of us have no way to judge these numbers.
Edit: it's amazing how feminists are generally numerically illiterate, but you still manage to be as wrong as they are.