I get what you're saying. I just disagree that you can separate the two.

Though, I agree it's a one way relationship. In other words, sexual assault can be considered a form of harassment. But sexual harassment does not rise to the level of assault. On an individual, case by case basis, meeting legal standards.

To use your example, cheating tourists out of money is a form of fraud, it's coercion. Fraud is a type of theft. Stealing money at gunpoint is not the same as snookering people out of theirs.

But, let's say you chest tourists and although nobody's happy about it nothing happens to you. What's to keep you from larger frauds? Or moving up to picking pockets? Or mugging? Not much. There actually isn't significant penalty for that either, even though it degrades the commons. The judiciary doesn't care until you get into theft of institutional money, big money, or money from power (WalMart, etc).

Certain people are always going to do what they can get away with. That's why it's so important to hold the line when it comes to protecting the commons. That slippery slope is rough to clean up once you're on it.

It's the same.dynamic with sexual harassment and sexual assault. It's the same (lack of) response from the judiciary. Nobody cares about the assaults on women until it becomes a free for all that cripples society. That slippery slope has been there all along.

Do I think we need to be clear about language in our articles? Yes. Always be as precise as possible. Of course.

I don't have a problem with you breaking it down to show what's included in that percentage. That's an important consideration. I disagree with doing so in a manner that suggests the numbers are false or a fabrication. They're not. It really is where we are. I disagree with doing so in a manner that suggests things that make the list are a false flag, or not a real problem. They are.

Because, again, it's not just about what happens to the individual. It's about what these dynamics do to society and culture as a whole.