From van Hofer (2000), previously cited:

] In 1996, the average number of rape offences registered in 35 European countries was 6.6 per 100,000 of population (see Table I), whilst Sweden presented a level of 18.2 per 100,000 – almost three times the average

Do you accept that that was true?

If so, why were Sweden's rape statistics in 1996 so much higher than the rest of Europe's?

Why couldn't those systemic factors still be true now?

And even more so, as Sweden's definition of what "rape" means has expanded.

Thus, in 1996 it was 3x and now it's, what, 4x that of Europe's average? And you think it's some recent event which caused the change, rather than being a long-time difference between the countries?

Are the Snopes writers wrong when they wrote "Reported cases have remained steady for almost a decade"? You suggested the "recently admitted hundreds of thousands of disproportionately male immigrants" affected the statistics, but if those statistics didn't change then it's clearly not caused by your hypothesis.

Especially if the "objective comparison (reported figures to reported figures)" shows Sweden's rape leadership status was already in place in the 1990s.

> Which countries? "Denmark." Nope, they count offences.

When did they start counting offenses?

> By contrast, you find a 20+ year old Amnesty International document that cites someone who claims that Denmark reports cases not crimes.

The Amnesty International report was from 2008; 14 years ago.

You're thinking of van Hofer (2000). Which gives the example of how a single report in 1993 nearly doubled Sweden's rape statistics for that month, and shows why your argument based on incredulity isn't a strong one.

Why has the several-fold difference between Sweden's rape statistics and the average for Europe existed for 20+ years?

> That's not a good way of investigating

While you seemingly don't investigate at all. You JAQ-off then criticize any answers you get as not being good enough for you. You misread graphs. You get citations wrong.

> I claimed that Sweden is the regional leader for rape. That's a claim about the current year, not 2017.

Sweden has seemingly been the regional leader for rape for at least 25 years.

And you're only concerned about 2022?

Why is that? Do you really think the are so disconnected that you can ignore history?

Surely you must know that an internet comment board for computer nerds isn't a good place to find the active investigators in the field of international rape statistics gathering who will be able to give you the latest statistics.

Why can't you point to scholarly publications of people who have demonstrated that these older publications are no longer valid? Surely the Danish or German equivalents have the expertise to identify the flaws, and reasons to publish the information. (As I recall, BRÅ said if Sweden followed Germany's methodology then Sweden would be about average for Europe. Why would Germany accept that sort of shade if it were wrong?)

While I can easily find experts willing to write things like "the Nordic countries have a broad judicial definition of rape that includes actions that are not labelled as sexual crimes in many other countries, thus leading to a higher number of reported crimes." (at https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/2578983X.2021.1... ), supporting my statement that "Sweden's rape definition is broader, and includes interactions which in many other countries would not be considered a rape" - a view you refused to believe I had researched.

> You seem to be saying that while Denmark and Sweden may have reporting parity now ...

I'm saying that cross-national comparisons about rape are difficult to make.

You want up-to-date details, you talk to the experts. Not some Joe Schmoe like me on Hacker News.

But you've apparently decided that you can't trust the experts, and that you aren't going to dig through Google Scholar to read the papers and understand the details for yourself.