Facts are data points. There are infinitely many, and they don't select themselves. Humans do that. You could as easily construct an opposite generality by picking different facts.
The energy behind comments like this isn't intellectual curiosity. It's pain left over from painful experiences. That's important, maybe more important than intellectual curiosity. Almost certainly more important. But we don't get anywhere when we argue about this through the armor of ideological categories, because that's not really what it's about. All that happens is that those with similar pain line up on one side and those with opposite pain line up on the other, each seeing the other as the culprit. What dialog is possible then? None.
So anyone with a painful experience is not allowed to participate in discussion? Are you going to ban rape victims from working to improve handling for rape cases next? You aren't even approaching these people from a neutral position and evaluating their data honestly, so if anyone should be disqualified from commenting, I think it is you at this point.
The energy behind comments like this isn't intellectual curiosity. It's pain left over from painful experiences. That's important, maybe more important than intellectual curiosity. Almost certainly more important. But we don't get anywhere when we argue about this through the armor of ideological categories, because that's not really what it's about. All that happens is that those with similar pain line up on one side and those with opposite pain line up on the other, each seeing the other as the culprit. What dialog is possible then? None.