Gender again. Sorry!

[AuroraSaab]

I'm going to guess that you will keep on repeating this nonsense ad nauseum until your last breath, along with all your other false readings of data, and various bits of cherry-picking.

One can only wonder why one of the scientists involved would backtrack after saying this in their actual research paper:


‘In this study, male-to-female individuals had a higher risk for criminal convictions compared to female controls but not compared to male controls. This suggests that the sex reassignment procedure neither increased nor decreased the risk for criminal offending in male-to-females.’ (2011: 6)

ie. Transwomen retain a male pattern of offending.

External pressure perhaps. Discussed here:


https://murrayblackburnmackenzie.or...ejne-et-als-findings-on-criminal-convictions/

There is no evidence that transwomen don't have the same pattern of offending as other men.

 

[monkers]

Gender ideology beliefs are protected in law. As they should be. You are wrong to say they aren't.

No, gender identities and gender reassignment are protected in law. So-called 'gender ideology' is not unless you are using this phrase to mean the gender ideology of bigots as 'philosophical belief'.

 

[monkers]

There is no evidence that transwomen don't have the same pattern of offending as other men.

The author of the Swedish study says that their report does not say that. The author refutes it. What more do you want?

 

[AuroraSaab]

No it isn't. This is wrong.

Discrimination against people just because you don't like them is legal? Are you quite sure? A shop can refuse to serve black people then? Or refuse to perform a service for Catholics?
'I can't let you appear at my club because gay/Jewish/gender critical/Asian/trans people make my staff feel unsafe' would all sound a bit discriminatory to me.

And the Stand club took legal advice and changed their position so they seem to agree too now.

 

[AuroraSaab]

No, gender identities and gender reassignment are protected in law. So-called 'gender ideology' is not unless you are using this phrase to mean the gender ideology of bigots as 'philosophical belief'.

Under the Equality Act it's just gender reassignment that's a protected characteristic. Thanks to Maya Forstater though, both your belief in innate gender identity is protected, and so is my belief in it not existing and in sex being immutable and binary. Noone can be discriminated against at work for believing either thing. Just as it should be.

Good old Maya. It's great that all people can believe what they want and have their right to to do so protected in law, isn't it?

 

[Milzy]

For real world examples of "transing away the gay" see Iran. It's not a trope.

Yeah heard a pod cast about this. Many were spared the death penalty by been ‘done’.

 

[icowden]

No we are farking not! This such reductionist bullshit. Some of us have minds too, not just brainless bodies with rampant hormones.

I was speaking biologically. If you look at human history however the biggest change in the fortunes of women was the invention of the contraceptive pill. Historically it was not uncommon for women to produce baby after baby. Not having babies is a modern thing.

It terms of biological imperative however, human males are tuned to see human females in terms of breeding. Of course we now have higher intelligence, free will and can make complex decisions, which in turn means that men don't impregnate every woman they meet. Can we be sure of the underlying biological imperative though and what that means for human behaviour?

 

[icowden]

As for Barbie Kardashian, there's other issues to consider. Nearly all hidden from public view by a court order. How many other boys at your junior school had what was clearly a girls first name. In his case Gabrielle.

Gabrielle Alejandro Gentile. An Italian Name. Gabriele is a male name in Italian. I suspect that the second "L" may have been an attempt to anglicise it.

 

[icowden]

Question. If Aurora, and I and JK Rowling and all the other people labelled as "TERFS" or "transphobes" are wrong, why is it so important that those "wrong" people are silenced? WHy is it essential for Rowlings name to be dropped from movie credits, why are people burning her books? Why are people organising boycotts of software related to Harry Potter?

What benefit does that have? How is that normal?

 

[monkers]

Discrimination against people just because you don't like them is legal? Are you quite sure? A shop can refuse to serve black people then? Or refuse to perform a service for Catholics?
'I can't let you appear at my club because gay/Jewish/gender critical/Asian/trans people make my staff feel unsafe' would all sound a bit discriminatory to me.

And the Stand club took legal advice and changed their position so they seem to agree too now.

I'm absolutely positive. Try calling the police if you are discriminated against - they'll soon tell you that it not in their competence as it is a civil matter, and not a criminal offence.

A shop can refuse to serve black people then?

Yes they can. What they can't do is to refuse to serve any person or group of people due to any protected characteristic. They can refuse to serve on some other basis. Saying 'we don't serve black people' would be unlawful, saying we don't admit people on some other basis would not be.

'I can't let you appear at my club because gay/Jewish/gender critical/Asian/trans people make my staff feel unsafe' would all sound a bit discriminatory to me.

It would be. However there is nothing wrong with a comedy club having a policy that it only books comedy acts would not be. If the Stand did not have such a policy and it had history in taking booking for political events, then I will agree there is room for argument.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I love how Classic insists Barbie Khardashian is a woman just like any other woman and then forgets and calls them 'him'.

 

[monkers]

Under the Equality Act it's just gender reassignment that's a protected characteristic. Thanks to Maya Forstater though, both your belief in innate gender identity is protected, and so is my belief in it not existing and in sex being immutable and binary. Noone can be discriminated against at work for believing either thing. Just as it should be.

Good old Maya. It's great that all people can believe what they want and have their right to to do so protected in law, isn't it?

Gender identities are protected under the 2004 Act, while legal sex and gender reassignment are protected characteristics under the EqA 2010.

How many times do you need to hear this before the penny drops?

 

[monkers]

I love how Classic insists Barbie Khardashian is a woman just like any other woman and then forgets and calls them 'him'.

While ironically after calling all trans women 'males', you've called her 'them' which is a pronoun that you've previously refused to use.

 

[multitool]

Eh? Mammals. They breed. The male ones impregnate as many females as possible. That's nature.

How many did you manage, icow?

 

[multitool]

One can only wonder why one of the scientists involved would backtrack after saying this in their actual research paper:


‘In this study, male-to-female individuals had a higher risk for criminal convictions compared to female controls but not compared to male controls. This suggests that the sex reassignment procedure neither increased nor decreased the risk for criminal offending in male-to-females.’ (2011: 6)

ie. Transwomen retain a male pattern of offending.

There is no evidence that transwomen don't have the same pattern of offending as other men.

This isn't evidence that they do.

Why? Because there is more to 'pattern' than raw crime numbers. The pattern would be if they are committing the same quantity of the same crimes.

This is important because you pivot straight from this somewhat useless piece of data to talking about crimes of violence or sexual assault against women hoping to make the association that trans women offer the same risk to cis women as cis men.

Could be shoplifting for all we know.