Gender again. Sorry!

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.
classic33

classic33

Me
CXRAndy said:
https://www.google.com/search?q=violent+assault+statistics+by+gender&biw=1229&bih=562&sxsrf=AB5stBi3obYltMT3TeEvk77DVfsxDj-Fbw:1689332619900&ei=iyuxZL62NpWN9u8Pq-Sl0Ac&oq=violent+assualts+in+england+2022&gs_lp=Egxnd3Mtd2l6LXNlcnAiIHZpb2xlbnQgYXNzdWFsdHMgaW4gZW5nbGFuZCAyMDIyKgIIATIFEAAYogQyBRAAGKIESIZaUABYszBwAHgBkAEAmAHfAqABsheqAQgwLjE4LjAuMbgBAcgBAPgBAcICBhAAGAcYHsICCBAAGAUYBxgewgIGEAAYBRgewgIIECEYoAEYwwTCAgoQIRigARjDBBgKwgIEECEYCuIDBBgAIEGIBgE&sclient=gws-wiz-serp

What percentage of violence is committed by men?


Ninety percent of people who commit violent physical assault are men. Males perpetrate 95% of all serious domestic violence. 6. The U.S. Department of Justice estimates that 95% of reported assaults on spouses or ex-spouses are committed by men against women.
Click to expand...
That, as said, is 98% prosecutions of the 55% arrested for such offences.
 
monkers

monkers

Legendary Member
AuroraSaab said:
If you want to argue for everything being unisex on the basis of women also being violent, then do so.
Click to expand...

It's another lie from you of course. I haven't argued for unisex. I've argued that you should mind your own business and leave everybody be.
 
classic33

classic33

Me
AuroraSaab said:
My view hasn't changed. It's not all men, but it's enough men to be a problem.

As described by the Wall Street Journal. I would be surprised if someone would sign a letter as a professor of psychiatry if they weren't.

She's still a professor of adolescent psychiatry etc. by the looks of it. And Finland has stepped back on puberty blockers btw.

No idea why you have misgendered her.
Click to expand...

AuroraSaab said:
You presented it as women being responsible for 55% of violence arrests, when it's actually 18%. It was a deliberate misdirection.


The argument is that all men are men. There are no special categories of men.

If you want to argue for everything being unisex on the basis of women also being violent, then do so. But that isn't what you are doing. You are arguing that a subset of men be treated differently to all other men because of how they feel.
Click to expand...
It's no longer all men, again. You keep on changing your view on this point.
That's not given in the piece linked.

The 18% is the prosecution percentage of the 55% arrested for violence against the person.
And as previously advocated by yourself, women should get "special treatment" by the courts for the worst offences.
 
monkers

monkers

Legendary Member
AuroraSaab said:
You presented it as women being responsible for 55% of violence arrests, when it's actually 18%. It was a deliberate misdirection.
Click to expand...

Yay, you've half-woken up.

Time after time, I've tried to alert you to your use of data, and you've attacked every honest use of mine.

You cherry-pick some numbers and simply invent others. Numbers are nothing without context.

It's the easiest thing to give a number as a percentage without context. The bigger the percentage number the scarier it looks - but it's an easy trick to pull off.

Yes, you've now seen what I did deliberately; now it's time to wise up and see what you are doing with data - it's criminal.

Now then, arrests for violence are only made if a report is made. Men are much less likely to report female violence against them that women are to report male violence against them. It's a big distortion.

If there's no report, there's no arrest, if there's no arrest, there's no cautions are charges. Cultural bias disadvantages men hugely.
 
Last edited:
A

AuroraSaab

Squire
No, you haven't, that's the point. You argue that transwomen are a special group to whom the normal safeguarding that we apply to other males shouldn't apply. You don't want unisex, or 3rd spaces, because there's no validation to be had. You simply push for access to women's spaces but only for transwomen, not all men.

If your point is that men are no threat to women then everywhere should be unisex surely?

Having been caught out in a lie, you are now trying to say you did it deliberately to make a point? You lied for a few days; seems like a lot of work just to make a weak point tbh. I admire the desperate attempt at a save though.
 
Last edited:
classic33

classic33

Me
AuroraSaab said:
No, you haven't, that's the point. You argue that transwomen are a special group to whom the normal safeguarding that we apply to other males shouldn't apply. You don't want unisex, or 3rd spaces, because there's no validation to be had. You simply push for access to women's spaces but only for transwomen, not all men.

If your point is that men are no threat to women then everywhere should be unisex surely?

Having been caught out in a lie, you are now trying to say you did it deliberately to make a point? You lied for a few days; seems like a lot of work just to make a weak point tbh. I admire the desperate attempt at a save though.
Click to expand...
Does that mean I'm telling the same lie, as I've been saying it's the conviction rate, not the arrest rate since you introduced it as 99%.
AuroraSaab said:
UCI cycling's governing body have today announced that the female category will be a protected class:


View: https://twitter.com/seaningle/status/1679825920884891649


Based on the science and research.
Click to expand...

Date on the UCI piece is from last week not today.
 
monkers

monkers

Legendary Member
AuroraSaab said:
No, you haven't, that's the point. You argue that transwomen are a special group to whom the normal safeguarding that we apply to other males shouldn't apply. You don't want unisex, or 3rd spaces, because there's no validation to be had. You simply push for access to women's spaces but only for transwomen, not all men.

If your point is that men are no threat to women then everywhere should be unisex surely?

Having been caught out in a lie, you are now trying to say you did it deliberately to make a point? You lied for a few days; seems like a lot of work just to make a weak point tbh. I admire the desperate attempt at a save though.
Click to expand...

Now listen very carefully, I will only say this once more.

People are the sex that is on their birth certificate. That is the law. Everything else you say about that is wrong. The protected characteristic of sex relies on what is stated on the birth certificate - nothing about the century long hard won rights for women to vote, nothing about the length and style of the urethra, and nothing about what Aurora and her friends want. To use your phrase - it's magical thinking.

The EqA deals with the rights to be free from discrimination, victimisation, and harassment of people.

The GRA deals with the rights of people to live their life free from interference.

You should not interfere in the rights of people living a free life, or discriminate against them, or victimise them, or harass them, but you are not just someone with an opinion, you've made it your life's work to interfere with their rights with false negative stereotypes.

Trans women are not harming women in the toilets, or in changing rooms, or in prisons. Nor are they punching TERFs in the face.

So my message is not about unisex facilities, or taking rights from women, or not caring for women or girls or any of you false mischaracterisations, it's this LEAVE PEOPLE ALONE.
 
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
:wahhey:

UCI have announced only females to race in female events.

With immediate effect

https://www.google.com/search?q=uci...rome-mobile&ie=UTF-8&chrome_dse_attribution=1
 
Last edited by a moderator:
D

Deleted member 159

Guest
Women only protection in

Fina
IAAF
UCI

I expect all other sports will fall into line soon
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

monkers
GCN+ and GCN app to close. Corporate bastards strike again.
Replies
3
icowden
And They're Off! The race for London Mayor begins again!
Replies
46
Salty seadog
Fantastic imagination from the Dutch.... Again.
Replies
6
Bromptonaut
Benefits Again
Replies
205
Top Bottom