You said that Japan was ahead in the reported statistics. And that statement is perfectly true. (What, we're going to use unreported statistics?) But it either says something very trivial, or else it implies that the reported statistics are unreliable and misleading. But it doesn't actually come out and say that. Still less does it supply any evidence for that.
A better, useful post would say, "That's only the reported statistics. But the official statistics are inaccurate, and more skewed in Japan than they are in other countries. Here's some evidence..."
Stats with more verification. A structured study as opposed to looking at police reports.
Again, reported sexual-assaults in the UK can not be compared to other countries unless you consider the difference in reporting rates.
It is not trivial to consider that before drawing conclusions from, or comparing, stats between countries, you need the context to properly interpret them.
The burden of proof is not on me, I am not making a claim. I did not use the stats to support a conclusion. As soon as you do, you need to justify that those figures can be interpreted the way you imply they should.
You said that Japan was ahead in the reported statistics. And that statement is perfectly true. (What, we're going to use unreported statistics?) But it either says something very trivial, or else it implies that the reported statistics are unreliable and misleading. But it doesn't actually come out and say that. Still less does it supply any evidence for that.
A better, useful post would say, "That's only the reported statistics. But the official statistics are inaccurate, and more skewed in Japan than they are in other countries. Here's some evidence..."