110
Everyone needs to worry about 62 million men — particularly men
(independentaustralia.net)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 02 May 2026
110 points (96.6% liked)
World News
2487 readers
583 users here now
Rules:
Be a decent person.
No racism, sexism, ableism, homophobia, transphobia, zionism/nazism, and so on.
Other Great News Communities:
Rules
Be excellent to each other
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Holy shit, what a dismissive take on the article. This exact reaction is part of the problem .
Who gives a shit about the accurate reporting of the number. How about the broader issue of a) sleep rape, proven in court, b) that rapists have published their exploits online, and C) that there is an audience for same.
Take your semantics and fuck off.
The points raised are important because they determine how prevalent the problem is, and how sensationalized the article is.
There are 6 BILLION internet users. So 1 in 100,000 internet users have viewed these rape videos. Oh wait, less than that, that's for the whole site. Oh wait, less than that, that's hits, not unique visitors. Oh wait, only half of that 6 billion are men, more or less. Oh wait, women view porn, too. Etc.
This takes it from something that statistically is a concern for my small city to something that statistically has a single dangerous individual in my city, at most.
We perhaps shouldn't make special units to deal with this where I live, but should maybe have awareness courses for law enforcement and healthcare professionals to help identify potential victims. Larger cities may want to take a different approach.
So you have personally poked enough holes in the article, and broken down the problem in your head sufficiently, that you are comfortable to ignore the issue.
It must be nice to love in a comfortable bubble like that.
I specifically said what I was comfortable with doing to respond to this problem, depending on the size of the local population and therefore the likelihood of this actually occurring. Neither response was 'nothing'.
Journalists are supposed to give a shit. Reporting needs to be accurate for people to be well informed, not sensational exploitation of an actual issue to personally profit from clicks.
Take that argument up with the editor. It doesn't respond to the concern.
If this is the first you're hearing of this I can understand your reaction, but this issue has been discussed for about two weeks and there's better reporting out there. You don't have to defend clickbait.
Yes it is the first, thank you for the response.