Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

This is exactly my point. Hay is dismissed by you as not being a scientist.

I dismiss that article because it's a poor one.
It makes statements that aren't backed up by the links it gives. Just like you.

However, Stock, at least according to you is a non-scientist but as free to comment as anyone. Stock misrepresented the findings of the Swedish study. In Sweden the study was accepted as legitimate and led to a change in the law.

It's literally in the text of the paper. The researchers haven't withdrawn either the study nor this paragraph from the Results section:

It is literally right there.

I guess you will remember that Swedish law at that time was still to sterilise people, and that had such fascination for the Nazis.

No idea why you think this is relevant to anything.

You are easily trapped and exposed.

And you must think everyone is stupid if you imagine that they read your verbose guff and believe it without checking.

 

[icowden]

This is exactly my point. Hay is dismissed by you as not being a scientist

Yes, because Hay is pretending to be a scientist.

 

[monkers]

Yes, because Hay is pretending to be a scientist.

huh? Like Stock and Ali for that matter he is an academic philosopher.

https://www.linkedin.com/in/markehay/

Experience​

• https://www.linkedin.com/search/results/all/?keywords=Self-Employed
  Freelance Writer, Editor & ResearcherFreelance Writer, Editor & Researcher
  Self-Employed · FreelanceSelf-Employed · FreelanceMay 2010 - Present · 14 yrs 5 mosMay 2010 to Present · 14 yrs 5 mosGreater New York City AreaGreater New York City Area
  • • RESPONSIBILITIES
      • Generate, research, and pitch story ideas; adapt pitches to suit outlets, editors, and audiences.
      • Translate broad editorial ideas or requests into stories that fit an outlet’s voice and mission.
      • Craft clean and concise copy on tight deadlines—often within 24 hours of commissions.
      • Tackle short-term projects and immediate priorities while also managing long-term endeavors.
      • Collaborate with community and visual editors to adapt stories for varied mediums.
      • Edit content from clients ranging from academics to trade outlets for clarity, concision, and logic.
      
      ACHIEVEMENTS
      • Spearheaded three large-scale VICE projects: Mass Shooting Tracker (2016), Tracking Trump’s Congress (2017-2018), and This Is How We Do It: A Series About Sex and Stigma (2019-2020).
      • Uncovered the true history of—and debunked a popular legend about—chicken tikka masala.
      • Exposed and destroyed a non-consensual pornography site that exploited intoxicated women.RESPONSIBILITIES • Generate, research, and pitch story ideas; adapt pitches to suit outlets, editors, and audiences. • Translate broad editorial ideas or requests into stories that fit an outlet’s voice and mission. • Craft clean and concise copy on tight deadlines—often within 24 hours of commissions. • Tackle short-term projects and immediate priorities while also managing long-term endeavors. • Collaborate with community and visual editors to adapt stories for varied mediums. • Edit content from clients ranging from academics to trade outlets for clarity, concision, and logic. ACHIEVEMENTS • Spearheaded three large-scale VICE projects: Mass Shooting Tracker (2016), Tracking Trump’s Congress (2017-2018), and This Is How We Do It: A Series About Sex and Stigma (2019-2020). • Uncovered the true history of—and debunked a popular legend about—chicken tikka masala. • Exposed and destroyed a non-consensual pornography site that exploited intoxicated women.…see more

EducationEducation​

• 
  University of OxfordUniversity of Oxford
  Master of Philosophy (MPhil), Islamic StudiesMaster of Philosophy (MPhil), Islamic Studies2012 - 20142012 - 2014
  • Grade: DistinctionGrade: Distinction
  • Activities and societies: The New Muslim Survey ProjectActivities and societies: The New Muslim Survey Project
  • • Researched and authored a thesis (awarded a Distinction) on the spread of Islam to the Horn of Africa. Researched and authored a thesis (awarded a Distinction) on the spread of Islam to the Horn of Africa.
• 
  Columbia College, Columbia UniversityColumbia College, Columbia University
  BA, Religion, Political Science - International RelationsBA, Religion, Political Science - International Relations2008 - 20122008 - 2012
  • Grade: 3.9952 (Phi Beta Kappa, Summa Cum Laude)Grade: 3.9952 (Phi Beta Kappa, Summa Cum Laude)
  • Activities and societies: • Campus Media - Editor-in-Chief of Awaaz: The Voice of South Asia, The Blue & White, and The Columbia Political Review; Contributor to the Columbia Daily Spectator and a number of other publications; Founder and Coordinator of the Inter-Publication Alliance
    • Student Wellness Project - Co-Founder/Co-Chair
    • Chai Chat (Hindi-Urdu Speaking Students' Association) - Treasurer and Hindi-Urdu TutorActivities and societies: • Campus Media - Editor-in-Chief of Awaaz: The Voice of South Asia, The Blue & White, and The Columbia Political Review; Contributor to the Columbia Daily Spectator and a number of other publications; Founder and Coordinator of the Inter-Publication Alliance • Student Wellness Project - Co-Founder/Co-Chair • Chai Chat (Hindi-Urdu Speaking Students' Association) - Treasurer and Hindi-Urdu Tutor…see more
  • • Studied Islamic culture and history in Somalia and Pakistan, as well as bureaucracy and organizational pathologies.

 

[AuroraSaab]

He doesn't need to be a scientist, he needs to be a better, serious, journalist. But he won't because his chosen path is churning out 5 minute read, click bait online articles.

Hardly anybody will be clicking through the links to see if his claims are substantiated but if you're going to present such shoddy journalism as support for your position you should be prepared to have it analysed and called out.

 

[classic33]

Hardly anybody will be clicking through the links to see if his claims are substantiated but if you're going to present such shoddy journalism as support for your position you should be prepared to have it analysed and called out.

But that's what you do, including clear misrepresentation of the reported "facts" to suit your cause.

You, however feel you're above questioning and having what media links questioned/being called out on them, reply with sarcastic responses. You hold yourself and your views above reproach, even when it's clear that they're wrong.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I'm not inclined to take lessons on evidence analysis from a poster whose main line of argument requires us going back to 1912 so he can say 'Women are just as violent as men. What about the violent Suffragettes?'.

 

[classic33]

I'm not inclined to take lessons on evidence analysis from a poster whose main line of argument requires us going back to 1912 so he can say 'Women are just as violent as men. What about the violent Suffragettes?'.

You keep wanting to return to the urinals, maybe you've a reason, that your not willing to explain. But you hate being corrected, and you hold your third party reporting above that of anyone else on here.

You're the one that keeps on wanting to go backwards, not me.

 

[monkers]

I'm not inclined to take lessons on evidence analysis from a poster whose main line of argument requires us going back to 1912 so he can say 'Women are just as violent as men. What about the violent Suffragettes?'.

The fact is that you are not prepared to listen to anyone who presents a different opinion to your own. Only your truth is truth even when it contains outright lies.

You really are an awful person. Not that it matters Aurora, hardly anybody is listening to you, and I doubt even fewer take you seriously.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You keep wanting to return to the urinals, maybe you've a reason, that your not willing to explain.

Me: I don't think men should be in women's single sex spaces, prisons, or sports. It's unsafe and unfair.

Classic33: No, there must be some other reason that you won't explain...

This is you. The man who thinks there isn't a single genuine reason why women should be allowed their own spaces. You literally don't think women deserve anything of their own. You think there must be some other secretive reason that we aren't telling you about why women and girls don't want to share changing rooms, facilities, services, or sports, with men.

To you, privacy, dignity, safety, and fairness, don't count as valid reasons so there must be some secret rationale going on. You have zero empathy for women and girls to the point where you can't even envisage a situation where men shouldn't be given access.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The fact is that you are not prepared to listen to anyone who presents a different opinion to your own. Only your truth is truth even when it contains outright lies.

You really are an awful person. Not that it matters Aurora, hardly anybody is listening to you, and I doubt even fewer take you seriously.

I'm not prepared to swallow your unevidenced bs, correct. I see you're speaking for the whole forum again.

 

[classic33]

Me: I don't think men should be in women's single sex spaces, prisons, or sports. It's unsafe and unfair.

Classic33: No, there must be some other reason that you won't explain...

This is you. The man who thinks there isn't a single genuine reason why women should be allowed their own spaces. You literally don't think women deserve anything of their own. You think there must be some other secretive reason that we aren't telling you about why women and girls don't want to share changing rooms, facilities, services, or sports, with men.

To you, privacy, dignity, safety, and fairness, don't count as valid reasons so there must be some secret rationale going on. You have zero empathy for women and girls to the point where you can't even envisage a situation where men shouldn't be given access.

Please show me where any of that has been said by me. I've questioned your motives for posting claims, and you've normally replied sarcastically, or in a put down manner.

I'm aware that you keep on repeating yourself, saying that I've said something. You're beginning to believe that what your saying is correct. Even when it's wrong.
As for dignity and safety, it works only one way in your case. And I've frequently questioned that, but you don't answer.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You've routinely put forward the case for trans identifying men being in women's prisons and sports. You continually suggest that there is some other reason for this - other than the glaringly obvious safety or fairness - which indicates that you don't think women and girls deserve safety and fairness. If you did, you wouldn't advocate for men being in their prisons or sports.

I have repeatedly said men deserve single sex spaces in certain circumstances for their privacy and dignity. They rarely need it for safety unless they are boys in a situation with men. I have no idea how you have imagined I have ever said otherwise.

 

[AndyRM]

You've routinely put forward the case for trans identifying men being in women's prisons and sports. You continually suggest that there is some other reason for this - other than the glaringly obvious safety or fairness - which indicates that you don't think women and girls deserve safety and fairness. If you did, you wouldn't advocate for men being in their prisons or sports.

I have repeatedly said men deserve single sex spaces in certain circumstances for their privacy and dignity. They rarely need it for safety unless they are boys in a situation with men. I have no idea how you have imagined I have ever said otherwise.

So I find the last bit of your post interesting. Why do you think men deserve single sex spaces in only "certain circumstances"?

If we're having binary single sex spaces, then surely there isn't any uncertainty? It's men in one area, women in the other.

 

[AuroraSaab]

So I find the last bit of your post interesting. Why do you think men deserve single sex spaces in only "certain circumstances"?

Because women also only need single spaces and services in only certain circumstances. There is no reason to separate by sex in most circumstances. You don't need separate spaces for men and women in most things, unless you're the Taliban. You only need single sex spaces where having them is necessary for say safety, privacy, and dignity, or other legitimate circumstance. That's a 'proportionate response to a legitimate aim', as the Equality Act puts it. That applies to both sexes.

Do you need single sex services for chiropody? No.
Do you need them for examination after being raped? Yes. That means men as well as women, of course.

Should golf clubs be able to exclude men for being gay? No.
Should gay men's choirs be able to exclude people for being female and/or straight? Yes.

Men deserve the privacy and dignity that single sex services and spaces give them too. The reality is that it is often of less discomfort to men to have women in those spaces and services than it is the other way round, simply because women aren't a physical or sexual threat to men and we are used to women performing caring roles like nursing or intimate care for the disabled and elderly.

If we're having binary single sex spaces, then surely there isn't any uncertainty? It's men in one area, women in the other.

Sounds great. Let's do that when it's required.

 

[AndyRM]

Because women also only need single spaces and services in only certain circumstances. There is no reason to separate by sex in most circumstances. You don't need separate spaces for men and women in most things, unless you're the Taliban. You only need single sex spaces where having them is necessary for say safety, privacy, and dignity, or other legitimate circumstance. That's a 'proportionate response to a legitimate aim', as the Equality Act puts it. That applies to both sexes.

Do you need single sex services for chiropody? No.
Do you need them for examination after being raped? Yes. That means men as well as women, of course.

Should golf clubs be able to exclude men for being gay? No.
Should gay men's choirs be able to exclude people for being female and/or straight? Yes.

Men deserve the privacy and dignity that single sex services and spaces give them too. The reality is that it is often of less discomfort to men to have women in those spaces and services than it is the other way round, simply because women aren't a physical or sexual threat to men and we are used to women performing caring roles like nursing or intimate care for the disabled and elderly.


Sounds great. Let's do that when it's required.

That's fair.

Although I reckon a third "gender neutral" (for want of a better term) provision should be there too, then there would be no uncertainty.