In my opinion the fact that the vast majority of rapes/sexual assaults committed on white victims are intraracial is very meaningful in itself.
You are right, the situation has changed compared to the times when white men could exploit their power over Black women. According to the 2008 data I have quoted there were no reported rapes/sexual assaults committed on Black victims by white offenders.
As to the pre-Civil war interracial rape numbers, Martha Hodes writes in her fascinating book "White Women, Black Men" that "the accusation of rape of white women by black men in the slave South, as well as during the Civil War, when white men were absent from Southern homes" was actually infrequent. The situation fundamentally changed only in the late 19th century when Black men started being portrayed as a threat to white women by racist propaganda (one can see some excellent examples of such propaganda here: http://exhibits.lib.unc.edu/exhibits/show/1898/primary/dem-sources/cartoons-no).
Let's remember, too, that many whites, especially in the South, refused to believe that a white woman could have a consensual relationship with a Black man. This makes any historical statistics on rapes committed by Black men on white women extremely unreliable.
The stats you are responding to are extremely misleading. It is not true that there were zero black victim/white perpetrator rapes. How could you see that statistic and not be skeptical? Look at the footnote.
*Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases
So they asked 10 or fewer black victims and none of them had been raped by a white person so they applied it to the total number of victims. It's actually shocking that they would report numbers based on such a small sample.
Second obvious factor is that the vast majority of rapes/sexual assaults happen within relationships of some kind (date rape). There are far more black male /white female relationships than there are white male / black female relationships. So you would expect some disparity between the number. Also due to the fact they count "verbal threats of rape or sexual assault" in these numbers.
And lastly, the pool of potential white victims (PWV) is 5x as large as the pool of potential black victims (PBV). This would negate your whole theory. (But statistics aren't my strength so maybe I am missing something)
Many thanks for pointing out that the estimate was based on 10 or fewer sample cases. This is a very important fact I have overlooked. I, too, find it shocking that they used such a small sample of Black women!
You are also right in pointing out that most rapes/sexual assaults happen in relationships of some kind and that the pool of potential white victims is much larger than the pool of potential Black victims.
I did not imply that there was something cheery about these data. What I meant is that they prove that white women in the US are usually raped by white men. You were wondering if there were any statistics and I have provided some statistics.
You are right, Black offenders are overrepresented among the rapists of white victims, but these statistics don't indicate that the "hypersexualized black male stereotype" may be true, contrary to what you seemed to be implying in an earlier comment ("Perhaps the statistics would demonstrate the utter falsity of the hypersexualized black male stereotype. An ancient and doggedly persistent "myth" might finally be laid to rest. But perhaps not.").
Various complex factors explain these statistics, I am later going to mention some academic articles. First of all, women are usually raped by men they know, not by strangers. Because of the current dynamics of interracial interactions there is a much greater likelihood of interaction between a Black man and a white woman than between a white man and a Black woman.
Secondly, in the case of stranger rape perpetrators probably don't look for victims in their own neighbourhoods. And if they look for them in other areas, it is much easier to get access to a white victim than to a Black victim. Thirdly, a white woman may be easy to be overpowered by a Black perpetrator both for psychological reasons (including the stereotype of the aggressive Black criminal) and for physical reasons (white American women are much less likely to be physically strong than Black women).
The statistics I have quoted prove that Black offenders are much more likely to rob than to rape white victims, which is not in the least surprising. Anyway "hypersexuality" (a highly questionable term) is not the same as the likelihood of committing rape. It would be much more helpful to study e.g. statistics on porn use. A man can have a very high libido without ever committing rape.
I have actually provided these statistics - you did not know them before our discussion, so you can't say "I know the statistics, now you do as well."
Of course "various complex factors" explain men's decisions to rape women. What I meant is that there is no basis to suggest that the current overrepresentation of Black offenders among the rapists of white victims is caused by the supposed "Black hypersexuality".
I was not talking about Black women fighting white assailants. I suggested that it may be easier to overpower a white woman. I am not talking about myths, Black women are simply much less likely to be thin than white women (I can quote statistical data if you don't believe it). Female thinness and fragility are not celebrated in Black cultures.
In my opinion the fact that the vast majority of rapes/sexual assaults committed on white victims are intraracial is very meaningful in itself.
You are right, the situation has changed compared to the times when white men could exploit their power over Black women. According to the 2008 data I have quoted there were no reported rapes/sexual assaults committed on Black victims by white offenders.
As to the pre-Civil war interracial rape numbers, Martha Hodes writes in her fascinating book "White Women, Black Men" that "the accusation of rape of white women by black men in the slave South, as well as during the Civil War, when white men were absent from Southern homes" was actually infrequent. The situation fundamentally changed only in the late 19th century when Black men started being portrayed as a threat to white women by racist propaganda (one can see some excellent examples of such propaganda here: http://exhibits.lib.unc.edu/exhibits/show/1898/primary/dem-sources/cartoons-no).
Let's remember, too, that many whites, especially in the South, refused to believe that a white woman could have a consensual relationship with a Black man. This makes any historical statistics on rapes committed by Black men on white women extremely unreliable.
Lets noodle them even further
The stats you are responding to are extremely misleading. It is not true that there were zero black victim/white perpetrator rapes. How could you see that statistic and not be skeptical? Look at the footnote.
*Estimate based on 10 or fewer sample cases
So they asked 10 or fewer black victims and none of them had been raped by a white person so they applied it to the total number of victims. It's actually shocking that they would report numbers based on such a small sample.
Second obvious factor is that the vast majority of rapes/sexual assaults happen within relationships of some kind (date rape). There are far more black male /white female relationships than there are white male / black female relationships. So you would expect some disparity between the number. Also due to the fact they count "verbal threats of rape or sexual assault" in these numbers.
And lastly, the pool of potential white victims (PWV) is 5x as large as the pool of potential black victims (PBV). This would negate your whole theory. (But statistics aren't my strength so maybe I am missing something)
Many thanks for pointing out that the estimate was based on 10 or fewer sample cases. This is a very important fact I have overlooked. I, too, find it shocking that they used such a small sample of Black women!
You are also right in pointing out that most rapes/sexual assaults happen in relationships of some kind and that the pool of potential white victims is much larger than the pool of potential Black victims.
Ha! That was a smooth way to play it off. I don't think anyone noticed
I did not imply that there was something cheery about these data. What I meant is that they prove that white women in the US are usually raped by white men. You were wondering if there were any statistics and I have provided some statistics.
You are right, Black offenders are overrepresented among the rapists of white victims, but these statistics don't indicate that the "hypersexualized black male stereotype" may be true, contrary to what you seemed to be implying in an earlier comment ("Perhaps the statistics would demonstrate the utter falsity of the hypersexualized black male stereotype. An ancient and doggedly persistent "myth" might finally be laid to rest. But perhaps not.").
Various complex factors explain these statistics, I am later going to mention some academic articles. First of all, women are usually raped by men they know, not by strangers. Because of the current dynamics of interracial interactions there is a much greater likelihood of interaction between a Black man and a white woman than between a white man and a Black woman.
Secondly, in the case of stranger rape perpetrators probably don't look for victims in their own neighbourhoods. And if they look for them in other areas, it is much easier to get access to a white victim than to a Black victim. Thirdly, a white woman may be easy to be overpowered by a Black perpetrator both for psychological reasons (including the stereotype of the aggressive Black criminal) and for physical reasons (white American women are much less likely to be physically strong than Black women).
The statistics I have quoted prove that Black offenders are much more likely to rob than to rape white victims, which is not in the least surprising. Anyway "hypersexuality" (a highly questionable term) is not the same as the likelihood of committing rape. It would be much more helpful to study e.g. statistics on porn use. A man can have a very high libido without ever committing rape.
I have actually provided these statistics - you did not know them before our discussion, so you can't say "I know the statistics, now you do as well."
Of course "various complex factors" explain men's decisions to rape women. What I meant is that there is no basis to suggest that the current overrepresentation of Black offenders among the rapists of white victims is caused by the supposed "Black hypersexuality".
I was not talking about Black women fighting white assailants. I suggested that it may be easier to overpower a white woman. I am not talking about myths, Black women are simply much less likely to be thin than white women (I can quote statistical data if you don't believe it). Female thinness and fragility are not celebrated in Black cultures.