Gender again. Sorry!

[multitool]

You really aren't very good at this are you.

I debunked your claim that "the vast majority of women" don't want trans women in single sex spaces. I showed you a 2020 survey of women's attitudes.

Just as I caught you out before, now you are posting a 2022 survey, hoping that I won't notice that it isn't a survey of women, but a survey of men and women.. which is of course irrelevant to the discussion in hand, and of course the point you were attempting to make.

At this point I'm really not sure whether you are doing this through bad faith, or sheer ineptitude.

Could be both, I suppose.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You didn't. You provided a link to a report with no data. Might be helpful if you included screen shots rather than expecting us to wade through a link within a link to find this info.

I'm glad you acknowledge that it's women's opinions that really count though. And of course, even those women who do agree with giving men access to female spaces don't have the right to consent on behalf of the women who don't.

I'm guessing if you found a survey that said 51% of women were happy having transwomen in their swimming baths changing room that would totally swing it for you because the consent of the other 49% doesn't matter.

 

[multitool]

No, I found a survey that disproved your claim that the "vast majority of women don't want trans women in their spaces".

Turns out the majority of women are trans inclusive. One step at a time, Aurora.

With regards to screenshots etc. No, sorry, Aurora, I'm not going to pander to your intellectual indolence. Read the whole report, because context matters. Opinions should be based on facts, rather than prejudice and I'm at the point now where I'm not prepared to accept anything you say in good faith.

There is, however, a seperate discussion to be had on public opinion, with reference to the survey to which you alluded in your gross attempt to obfuscate your own mendacity. Yes, I'm not at all surprised to see a recent gradual shift in public (ie men and women, not just women) opinion towards trans issues. Why? Because the zeitgeist is heavily influenced by what people are presented in front of them, and the so-called "trans debate" has been seized upon by the right-wing press as a lightning rod with which to scare and enrage people. They are the client media of the political right who are fully invested in the distractive culture war. It is no surprise to discover that the anti-trans lobby group, the LGB Alliance, links back to....you guessed it... 55 Tufton Street.

There are now about 1000 anti-trans articles in mainstream UK media per month. There are people (the repugnant Kellie-Jay Keen springs to mind) who have discovered that it is lucrative enough to earn a living from in a manner redolent of fellow grifter and fan, Tommy Robinson.

Poor old Graham Linehan, though, eh.

 

[qigong chimp]

Blimey.
We're back at Wimbledon 2001, Pete Sampras in his prime, the king of Centre Court, expected to swat aside a callow Swiss teenager by the name of Roger Federer. But hang on, what are we seeing?

Thomas Kuhn told me there'd be days like this.

 

[icowden]

It says TW offend at higher rates than females, but not males.ie. TW maintain the offending pattern of males.
Interestingly TM do not...

It would seem to confirm that being born male or taking testosterone makes you a bit more prone to committing crime or violent crime.

And, by the way, currently in UK prisons there are more violent incidents (per pop.) in female prisons than male prisons.

I can't find research to substantiate this, only the other way around.

Let's apply that logic to other areas of life. We know that some men are paedophiles. We know they are far more likely than women to be paedophiles. Some paedophiles masquerade as teachers to gain access to children. Children's spaces are regulated by safeguarding law to keep paedophiles out. Therfore we should exclude all men from schools because we just can't tell which ones are which. And it doesn't matter that it's a tiny minority. Just one is one too many. Kick men out. Don't try telling me that this is unfair to men because allowing men in comes at no cost to you. Its easy for you, because its the children that suffer.

The problem with this absolutism is that it misses the point somewhat. To work with children you have to undergo a number of safety checks including DBS screening. You are right that a very tiny number of teachers have turned out to be Paedophiles and have managed to slip through the screening process.

What you would seem to be suggesting is that all Transwomen should have to undergo extended screening and obtain a certificate in order to be able to access women's spaces. Do you think that the pro-Trans movement would go for this? Or the feminist movement? The reality is that *any* form of checks or regulation of gender is immediately slammed down as being "anti-trans", "hate crime". No discussion must be held as these people will be upset and commit suicide. Their mental health cannot cope with the concept of having to be checked or certified.

@Glinner was posting only recently of a dating app for Lesbian women where people are considered to be committing a hate crime if they refuse to date a trans woman "lesbian", or as others might suspect "straight man in a dress".

This is not to say that there are not men and women out there who do not suffer terribly from mental health issues around gender identity, and no-one is saying that these people should not be helped, cared for, treated as they want to be treated. What does appear to be happening, much to everyone's surprise, is that some men may be taking advantage. Gender ID does not require gender reassignment surgery or hormone treatment.

 

[multitool]

Blimey.
We're back at Wimbledon 2001, Pete Sampras in his prime, the king of Centre Court, expected to swat aside a callow Swiss teenager by the name of Roger Federer. But hang on, what are we seeing?

Thomas Kuhn told me there'd be days like this.

Nothing so profound as a paradigm shift going on here, although at heart there appears to be a conflict between language in its common usage, and legal terminology. Pete sees no distinction between the two, a grinning Roger gets the nuance.

 

[multitool]

It would seem to confirm that being born male or taking testosterone makes you a bit more prone to committing crime or violent crime

This warrants further reflection, not least on the types of crime.

can't find research to substantiate this, only the other way around.

Government's own stats.

What you would seem to be suggesting is that all Transwomen should have to undergo extended screening and obtain a certificate in order to be able to access women's spaces. Do you think that the pro-Trans movement would go for this?

This isnt what I am suggesting. I'm pointing out where reductionist thinking can lead.

@Glinner was posting only recently of a dating app for Lesbian women where people are considered to be committing a hate crime if they refuse to date a trans woman "lesbian", or as others might suspect "straight man in a dress".

This is old hat. The BBC repeated this story without doing due diligence, then withdrew it. Moral panic 101.

 

[AuroraSaab]

I'm not scrolling through a hundred pages to find data you couldn't be arsed to post yourself.

Yes and the context is that whilst there is general support for transgender people, when you spell it out that most transwomen keep their penis, people are less supportive of giving them access to women's spaces. Unsurprisingly.

Suggesting that support for transgender people is falling is because of negative coverage in the media is nonsense.

It's falling because people got fed up of the No Debate stance and started looking into stuff. It's falling because people see black clad aggressive activists preventing women meeting peacefully in public. They see people being removed from jobs and losing work because they questioned the 'anybody can be a woman' mantra of transactivism. They see the erosion of language to satisfy a tiny percentage of the population and start questioning it.

People read the Cass Report and realised that the huge increase in kids saying they are trans is something we should be concerned about. And they see men's crimes reported as women's crimes. And guess what they, don't like it.

As to grifting, nothings been a bigger grift than the campaign for trans inclusiveness. After same sex marriage was legalised there wasn't much left for Stonewall so they had to find something else to justify their existence. And what a gravy train transactivism has been. From telling kids in school there are 200 genders, to persuading health authorities to call women 'vagina havers', it's certainly been a big earner.

I have to give it to you though, mate. Nobody is working harder than you to get that 0.12% of the population of blokes who say they are women, and who have mostly kept their penises, into female spaces this week.

Your determination to get men into changing rooms, refuges, and prisons really has been something to behold.

 

[icowden]

Government's own stats.

But that's just the surface stat. It's important to remember that there are 80,000 incarcerated men but only 3000 incarcerated women, and that:

However, the proportion of assaults in female establishments that were serious was lower, at 6% compared with 11% in male establishments.

So we are looking at a maximum of 1170 female prisoners committing assaults (it's going to be less than that, as it's quite likely that prisoners will assault people multiple times in 6 months) compared to a maximum of 20,320 men committing assaults which are generally more serious. There is also a much higher rate of self harm and mental health issues in women's prisons.

No, I found a survey that disproved your claim that the "vast majority of women don't want trans women in their spaces".
Turns out the majority of women are trans inclusive. One step at a time, Aurora.

@AuroraSaab found a survey that shows the opposite, therefore at the moment the jury is out. Yougov sampled 1700 people, Equalityhumanrights sampled 3000 people. What we have learned is that a small sample isn't representative, or that the survey had some subtextual weighting which has brought out different results. We have also learned that no-one cares whether trans men uses the mens room.

 

[multitool]

I'm not scrolling through a hundred pages to find data you couldn't be arsed to post yourself.

Why does this not surprise me

People read the Cass Report

Not everyone read it

<snort>

 

[multitool]

But that's just the surface stat. It's important to remember that there are 80,000 incarcerated men but only 3000 incarcerated women, and that:

Dear God. I despair.

Somebody who doesn't understand the word 'rate' is arguing with me over statistics.

Not only that, but he hasnt understood that the two surveys on attitudes to trans people have completely different samples, only one of which is germane to AS's rantings.

 

[AuroraSaab]

This is old hat. The BBC repeated this story without doing due diligence, then withdrew it. Moral panic 101.

The story - that young lesbians are being pressured into including transwomen in their dating pool - was changed not dropped because one of the lesbians quoted was found to have made violent and inappropriate comments in the past. Not because lesbians being told to date transwomen isn't an issue. Here it is, people can read it for themselves:

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-57853385

Here's two adverts for a gay speed dating evening this week. No mention that transmen are invited to the gay men event, but lesbians are expected to include transwomen.

It's amazing how many transwomen seem to be lesbians though, isn't it.

I'll add that my lesbian friends get fed up of being 'matched' with men on lesbian dating apps and being approached by transwomen in fb lesbian groups. Just invading woman's exclusive social media is a thrill for some men.

No man can be a lesbian. No lesbian has a penis. This stuff is just repackaged homophobia, denying young women the right to be exclusively same sex attracted and exclude men as sexual partners.

 

[icowden]

Somebody who doesn't understand the word 'rate' is arguing with me over statistics.

I'm failing to see how extrapolating a rate per thousand over the current prison population is me not understanding rate? My point is that the rate in women's prisons is representative of a much smaller pool of people, who usually have mental health issues, as well as the assault being less violent.

Not only that, but he hasnt understood that the two surveys on attitudes to trans people have completely different samples, only one of which is germane to AS's rantings.

How so?

The EHRC Survey:

Carried out by the National Centre for Social Research annually since 1983, the BSA is an authoritative source of data on the views of the British public. It uses a random probability sampling methodology to yield a representative sample of adults aged 18 and over living in private households in Britain.
In 2019, 3,224 adults were interviewed face-to-face, and 2,636 of them additionally answered questions in a self-completion format.

YouGov:

YouGov Survey Results Sample Size: 1751 adults in GB Fieldwork: 19th - 20th May 2022.

Who takes part in Public Opinion research?​

Over the last eighteen years, YouGov has carefully recruited a panel of over 1 million British adults to take part in our surveys. Panel members are recruited from a host of different sources, including via standard advertising, and strategic partnerships with a broad range of websites.

When a new panel member is recruited, a host of socio-demographic information is recorded. For nationally representative samples, YouGov draws a sub-sample of the panel that is representative of British adults in terms of age, gender, social class and education, and invites this sub-sample to complete a survey.

To reiterate, with Active Sampling only this sub-sample has access to the questionnaire via their username and password, and respondents can only ever answer each survey once.

So why is the YouGov Survey irrelevant and the EHRC one relevant? Is it because the EHRC supports your argument whilst the YouGov one does not?

 

[multitool]

Been pondering other countries' experiences of self-ID laws in the light of Aurora's claim that through the fiendishly simple sophistry of recording all trans women as female crime, it is impossible to gauge the impact.

Turns out she was talking bollocks.

https://www.openlynews.com/i/?id=21757767-4909-4844-922f-41903ff042f8

Reuters report on the decade of experience in Argentina. With a quote below, because AS doesn't like reading:

"Other women's groups - and the government - say fears of an uptick in gender-related violence have not transpired.

"We haven't had situations of violence from our travesti and trans sisters," said Candelaria Botto of Ecofeminita, one of the country's most prominent feminist groups. Other feminist groups FEIM, ELA and Colectiva La Revuelta agreed.

Greta Pena, a senior policy officer at Argentina's equality ministry, said there was no evidence of any rise in violence against non-trans women since the law was passed.

A 2021 government study found that one trans woman was accused and convicted of sexual abuse between 2013 and 2019. *

"No one has all the information, but violence (by trans people) ... isn't a problem that data shows," said Carla Majdalani, head of the UN Women's programme against gender-based
violence in Argentina."

*For the thickies: clearly, in Argentina, the distinction between cis women and trans women is made in the reporting of crime. Otherwise this piece of information would be unavailable.

 

[multitool]

So why is the YouGov Survey irrelevant and the EHRC one relevant? Is it because the EHRC supports your argument whilst the YouGov one does not?

Nope, it's because AS was talking exclusively about the attitudes of women, and got it completely wrong. When challenged she changed the goalposts hoping I wouldn't notice.

I'm not going to go back and forth with you on this point because you clearly haven't read the thread closely.