Don't think of an elephant.

I had a small epiphany while discussing things with a feminist recently.

Every time she was able to pull a random statistic out of her bag of tricks and tout that it was proof of patriarchy or rape culture, not once did she ever make a real accusation. She would make claims, but never accusations.

The title of this post is very relevant, I promise. Those of us who've come across the "rape whistle" ad from the Canadian Women's Foundation (or whatever it's called), this is the underlying tactic. Make a claim, but not an accusation.

What do you think of when I say "Don't think of an elephant?" An elephant, right?

Apologies to those who've already heard this a zillion times, but for those of you who haven't heard it before, bear with me (or elephant with me).

This quip deals with the concept of jury contamination. In any trial, there are many very strict rules to follow when presenting evidence. Some things are permissible, a great many things are not, and if you introduce an impermissible piece of information as evidence, then you've contaminated the jury with an idea that serves no purpose in the trial. Things like hearsay or suppositions are impermissible because they're not evidence. They have no factual base in reality, or they cannot be trusted on their own merit.

This is extremely relevant in the tactics used by radical feminists, because often times they will make claims which plant a seed of doubt in the minds of the people listening, but skirt away from making outright accusations.

"1 in 4 women are raped in America" is the claim. The accusation is "There are many, MANY rapists, or a smaller community of very busy rapists in America."

"30% of women who are killed are murdered by their boyfriends or husbands," is a little more straight forward. The accusation is "Men murder their girlfriends/wives at X per capita."

"1 in 2 women are the victims of sexual or physical violence in Canada," is the claim. The accusation is "Either half the men in Canada are mentally ill, or there is a relatively large (1 million +) population of abusers and sexual assailants in Canada."

Don't think of an elephant...

Thanks to the generally accepted idea that "rape," as it was defined up until a few months ago, is a crime that only a man could commit, the first thing you think of is a man raping or beating a woman. This is the kind of accusation that card-pullers and shameless bandiers of statistics will shy away from, because it's easier to understand and commiserate with the suffering of women (who are the "primary victims" according to Ms. Clinton) than it is to understand the sheer gravity of the accusation that there are currently 1 million rapists or abusers in Canada, or 5 million rapists and abusers in the United States.

I propose that whenever these statistics are trotted out, respond with "According to your math, there must be X rapists committing Y rapes throughout their lifetimes." Make them face the utterly impossible reality of their claims.

Instead of them being the constant victim, they become the accuser. They are putting forth an accusation which is, quite frankly, untenable.

Edit: Edited out "For every time"