Gender again. Sorry!

[monkers]

Lowered testosterone doesn't mitigate the effect of years of male socialisation, just as lowered testosterone doesn't mitigate the effects of a male body in sport. Neither can be undone. We do know however that testosterone is one element in male aggression and it seems unlikely that it wouldn't produce a similar effect in females as it does in males, though obviously tempered by the fact females are socialised differently.

Also, the requirement from transactivists is that there should be no gatekeeping as to who is transgender. You don't have to be on hormones or undergo surgery, it's simply self ID. Thus discussion as to whether transwomen as an overall general population are more or less disposed towards male pattern violence is a bit moot, as not all of them will be on hrt or undergoing surgery. We can only go on the research data and prison statistics which suggests they retain a male pattern of criminality.

It's nonsense for people to postulate that testosterone farks up female brains, but HRT has no effect on the brains of trans women while also saying that there's no such thing as male and female brains. Marcia Bowers is just one who says otherwise.

What we are seeing in the postulation is prejudice in plain sight.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You're working one way, again. And making it sound like they simply decide, on the spur of the moment, that they are male, not female.

If gender identity is innate and being socialised as a male has no effect, you would expect that transwomen would offend at the same rate as women. They don't. They offend at the same rate as other men. You can't undo decades of male cultural socialisation by reducing testosterone with hrt, whether it's a few months or a few years worth. It's the way we socialise our children, our overall culture and society, plus the effects of testosterone that contribute to males being more likely to comit violent crime, especially young men.

 

[classic33]

If gender identity is innate and being socialised as a male has no effect, you would expect that transwomen would offend at the same rate as women. They don't. They offend at the same rate as other men. You can't undo decades of male cultural socialisation by reducing testosterone with hrt, whether it's a few months or a few years worth. It's the way we socialise our children, our overall culture and society, plus the effects of testosterone that contribute to males being more likely to comit violent crime, especially young men.

As I said, you're working one way only. Think before posting, it'll help.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Please don't pretend that the science is at an end point and that you understand it.

Marcia Bowers for instance, who has done work on this, asserts that hormone replacement therapy decreases bone density and muscle mass to similar levels of cis women. Other scientists say that heavier limbs - or levers as they sometimes will call them - require the accompanying muscle that is lost has causation in a drop of physical performance. Pippa York states that during her transition, she found that lowering testosterone meant that her body needed greater recovery time, reducing the time available for training, noting that this causes a significant reduction in performance.

Both are transwomen so not exactly independent in terms of the sports argument. Even so, physical changes to the body are irrelevant to patterns of criminality. Men who run slowly, men who can't cycle fast, men who can't lift weights, don't have reduced levels of criminality as far as I know. Why would they? The main common denominator for crimes of violence, all other things like age and class being equal, is being born male.

Nobody, male or female, is born violent. It's socialisation, plus adding other stuff to the mix later.

One recent scientific review of the available literature gave an opinion that trans women do have an advantage, but it is not so much a matter of testosterone, and more about the socialising process of males, the bigger pool of those wishing to be in various sports and athletics, and the better opportunities and prizes available to them.

None of the above says that there can not be advantage; it indicates that the science is too young to make these dogmatic claims.

Simply not true. There are about 15 studies now that show male advantage in most sports. Under pressure from activists, sports rushed to include transwomen based on poor quality, limited research (see Joanna Harper and the IOC), thinking it would not be much of an issue. It was. Now there is more research and sports are following the science and protecting the female class to maintain fairness.

 

[monkers]

If gender identity is innate and being socialised as a male has no effect, you would expect that transwomen would offend at the same rate as women. They don't. They offend at the same rate as other men. You can't undo decades of male cultural socialisation by reducing testosterone with hrt, whether it's a few months or a few years worth. It's the way we socialise our children, our overall culture and society, plus the effects of testosterone that contribute to males being more likely to comit violent crime, especially young men.

The Hale case alone indicates that you are incorrect. Trans women have been implicated at a lower rate than cis men and cis women in all of that violence.

 

[AuroraSaab]

As I said, you're working one way only. Think before posting, it'll help.

So both gender and identity and criminality are innate? Neither is affected by socialisation? Seems unlikely to be honest. Otherwise males and females would have pretty similar stats for committing violent crime; they don't.

 

[monkers]

Both are transwomen so not exactly independent in terms of the sports argument. Even so, physical changes to the body are irrelevant to patterns of criminality. Men who run slowly, men who can't cycle fast, men who can't lift weights, don't have reduced levels of criminality as far as I know. Why would they? The main common denominator for crimes of violence, all other things like age and class being equal, is being born male.

Nobody, male or female, is born violent. It's socialisation, plus adding other stuff to the mix later.


Simply not true. There are about 15 studies now that show male advantage in most sports. Under pressure from activists, sports rushed to include transwomen based on poor quality, limited research (see Joanna Harper and the IOC), thinking it would not be much of an issue. It was. Now there is more research and sports are following the science and protecting the female class to maintain fairness.

One is a surgeon and scientist, the other was an elite level athlete. Here you are on the one hand complaining that women are not being listened to, while simultaneously dismissing the lived experiences of two women because they share a protected characteristic. It reveals bigotry and hypocrisy.

 

[Milzy]

 

[monkers]

View attachment 3482

You know how photoshop works and how false flag attacks work? If you believe everything you see on the internet then you may need some protection from yourself.

 

[AuroraSaab]

The Hale case alone indicates that you are incorrect. Trans women have been implicated at a lower rate than cis men and cis women in all of that violence.

Male born is the common denominator in the vast majority of violent crime in every country where they keep records. Grasping at the tiny subset of violent crime that school shootings represent doesn't change the overall stats. You and Classic seem to be arguing that criminality is innate and transwomen have always been female so don't commit crime at male rates - no evidence for this. Or that hrt can somehow magically undo years of male socialisation - again no evidence for this. All based on the small subset of violent crime that is school shootings in the USA.

One is a surgeon and scientist, the other was an elite level athlete. Here you are on the one hand complaining that women are not being listened to, while simultaneously dismissing the lived experiences of two women because they share a protected characteristic. It reveals bigotry and hypocrisy.

Both are transwomen; one earns a good living performing genital surgery, the other would have greatly benefitted from transwoman inclusion during their career. Both have a huge vested interest in promoting transwoman inclusion in female sports. They aren't independent voices.

I'm not dismissing their input entirely. I'm just saying that the science doesn't support their opinions and their voices shouldn't be prioritised over that of women athletes - who are increasingly finding the confidence to say No (even though they face penalties for doing so).

 

[monkers]

Male born is the common denominator in the vast majority of violent crime in every country where they keep records. Grasping at the tiny subset of violent crime that school shootings represent doesn't change the overall stats. You and Classic seem to be arguing that criminality is innate and transwomen have always been female so don't commit crime at male rates - no evidence for this. Or that hrt can somehow magically undo years of male socialisation - again no evidence for this. All based on the small subset of violent crime that is school shootings in the USA.



Both are transwomen; one earns a good living performing genital surgery, the other would have greatly benefitted from transwoman inclusion during their career. Both have a huge vested interest in promoting transwoman inclusion in female sports. They aren't independent voices.

I'm not dismissing their input entirely. I'm just saying that the science doesn't support their opinions and their voices shouldn't be prioritised over that of women athletes - who are increasingly finding the confidence to say No (even though they face penalties for doing so).

It's clear that you have little knowledge of scientific principle. You don't do well with interpretation of data either from what I've seen. Science is not an end state, it is a process of enquiry conducted under strict conditions to ensure reliability. Your cherry-picking of facts and or data, are not scientific or evidence of anything other than prejudice.

 

[classic33]

Both are transwomen so not exactly independent in terms of the sports argument. Even so, physical changes to the body are irrelevant to patterns of criminality. Men who run slowly, men who can't cycle fast, men who can't lift weights, don't have reduced levels of criminality as far as I know. Why would they? The main common denominator for crimes of violence, all other things like age and class being equal, is being born male.

Nobody, male or female, is born violent. It's socialisation, plus adding other stuff to the mix later.


Simply not true. There are about 15 studies now that show male advantage in most sports. Under pressure from activists, sports rushed to include transwomen based on poor quality, limited research (see Joanna Harper and the IOC), thinking it would not be much of an issue. It was. Now there is more research and sports are following the science and protecting the female class to maintain fairness.

Parts on crime, almost a word for word copy from Gender and Crime at studysmarter.

Why is the number of girls caught carrying knives, in the UK, increasing year on year. With a 73% increase in the five years up to the end of 2019 in the number prosecuted for knife offences.

Girls are more likely to be stopped and found to be carrying a knife, but less likely to be stopped overall. So it skews the true figure somewhat.

 

[AuroraSaab]

It's clear that you have little knowledge of scientific principle. You don't do well with interpretation of data either from what I've seen. Science is not an end state, it is a process of enquiry conducted under strict conditions to ensure reliability. Your cherry-picking of facts and or data, are not scientific or evidence of anything other than prejudice.

As usual, abuse is all you've got. Previous research was poor quality, now it's better and more extensive so sporting bodies have acted accordingly.

World Athletics, World Rugby, the RFL, the RFU, World Triathlon, and Fina/Swimming have all looked at the evidence and excluded those born male from the female category. But I suppose you are better placed to assess the science than the experts in all those sporting bodies.

 

[Milzy]

You know how photoshop works and how false flag attacks work? If you believe everything you see on the internet then you may need some protection from yourself.

It’s a satire joke you monkey.

 

[multitool]

Previous research was poor quality, now it's better and more extensive

Stunningly incisive, erudite and profound assessment of contempory scientific methods and their antecedents.

Monkers, give up. This person really knows their shït.