[rationalist]

> rates

So something like 1 per 100,000; which of course is still 1 too many.

(The other comments in other branches seem to prove my point. I am not defending any institution by the way. No one should be covering up crimes and/or allowing criminals to victimize people further.)

[fluoridation]

"Rate" is an ambiguous word. Molested children per year is a rate just as molested children per total children is.

>something like 1 per 100,000

What is this? What number are you citing, and where are you getting it from?

[rationalist]

I've never heard anyone say that a rate is ambiguous.

It seems like you're trying to be disingenuous, first with "rate", now with my clearly-arbitrary example of rate.

> something like

[fluoridation]

A rate is just a ratio between two quantities. You've never heard speed defined as the rate of movement?

I might have interpreted your example as such if not for the "one too many" comment. It's strange to throw out a completely fictitious figure and then lament it as if it's real.

[godwinson__4-8]

who is fighting windmills now? :P

see how your patience has been rewarded... no good deed goes unpunished. he will never produce an actual figure. look at his other replies. such a victim complex. on behalf of the catholic church. regarding their sexual abuse of minors. what more is there to say?

[rationalist]

> he will never produce an actual figure.

> It's strange to throw out a completely fictitious figure and then lament it as if it's real.

You two are insufferable.

Anyway:

If you do an online search, the first results you may get, say how hard it is to compare. Here is one comparison that I did find:

https://actheologian.com/2025/04/22/comparing-child-abuse-ra...

Please note, this is not where I got my figures years ago, as I no longer have access to that source.

> Public Schools ~450 per 100,000

> Boy Scouts ~100–200 per 100,000

> Protestant Churches Likely 1–5 per 100,000

> Catholic Church (Priests Only) ~1 per 100,000

Also note, something like 90% of the Boy Scout sexual abuse cases were prior to the 1970s before they started mandating adults to take youth protection training. Today, the Boy Scouts and Catholic Church have some of the most comprehensive youth protection traing around, way better than any schools' youth protection training according to educators that I've talked with.

Good riddance. Go sharpen your ideological axes somewhere else.

[phoghed]

No, it seems more like you are being disingenuous. All you have to do is drop a link to the rates you’re referring to. Instead you’re just arguing semantics. Where’s the receipts?

[rationalist]

> something like

I thought adding "for example" at the end was just unnecessary redundancy, but I guess I was wrong.

I still don't understand why the other person is trying to cross-examine me on the definition of "rate" or whatever though. That is the person arguing semantics, not me... (Same with you, except you're going one step further and trying to gaslight me.)

I'm curious, do you have something against churches and/or Scouts?

[phoghed]

No, you said explicitly that kids are sexually assaulted at a higher rate in schools than they are in churches or scouts.

You clarified that you mean per 100,000 children more are likely to be sexually assaulted in schools.

Usually when someone has a belief like this, it’s grounded by something that they read or learned somewhere. Where did you learn this? Why aren’t you sharing the source with everyone else so they can learn it too?

But there’s still nuance there that you’re ignoring as well. We could say that rate should be examined per hour because a kid will spend 30 hours per week at school vs a few hours per week at scouts or church. Without your source though, we have no idea what the rates are, if they are what you say, if there’s even a significant difference, etc.

Now you’re trying to act like a victim because people want clarity on what exactly you mean and where you learned it.

Nobody is “gaslighting” you, just give the receipts.

[rationalist]

> just give the receipts.

Just read my last comment I posted two hours before you posted yours?

> you’re ignoring as well.

You're assuming facts not in evidence.

> We could say that rate should be examined per hour because a kid will spend 30 hours per week at school vs...

"Don't worry Timmy, even though you were molested at school, because you're forced to go there every (week)day and spend more time there than church, Boy Scouts, etc, you statistically had less of a chance per hour of being molested."

Per hour makes zero sense.

Do you have something against churches or scouts? I can't imagine why you are being ao convoluted otherwise.

> Nobody is “gaslighting” you, just give the receipts.

I already gave the "receipts". Stop trying to gaslight me.

...

FYI everyone else: the Boy Scouts has a "two deep" leadership policy, meaning no private one-on-one contact between youth and adults. That's why 90+% of cases were from over 50 years ago. And don't believe everything you read on reddit, because I saw one comment where someone claimed they were abused as a kid by their troop manager... No one who actually was a Scout would call their Scoutmaster a "troop manager". It almost certainly was someone who was ideologically opposed to Boy Scouts. (If someone can teach me how to use reddit's aweful search function to find that comment, I'll gladly provide that "receipt".)