Gender again. Sorry!

[classic33]

In the UK it would depend on how individual NHS trusts were recording them. Just shows how important accurate recording is though. It would skew the data to record them as women and might mean that trans identifying men missed out on being given appropriate info.

It's a perfectly sensible answer btw. If you were that bothered you could have googled it yourself of course.

You haven't answered the question asked yet. And won't without putting your own spin on the answer. You avoid answering the question that was asked.

But, to follow your route for this part only, if they were correctly recorded as women, not men, at the point of treatment, they'd not fall into/under the figure of men with breast cancer. They'd be recorded as women with breast cancer.

Means you screwed up again.

 

[icowden]

In the UK it would depend on how individual NHS trusts were recording them. Just shows how important accurate recording is though. It would skew the data to record them as women and might mean that trans identifying men missed out on being given appropriate info.

Currently the NHS collects three datapoints for analysis:

• Person Phenotypic Sex (Male, Female or Indeterminate)
• Person Stated Gender (Male, Female or Indeterminate

These are then combined with

• Gender Identity Same at Birth Indicator (Yes, No, Declined to answer)

This means that for any dataset the data can be sliced by biological gender or not depending on the need of the research or analysis.

 

[AuroraSaab]

You haven't answered the question asked yet. And won't without putting your own spin on the answer. You avoid answering the question that was asked.

Why is male breast cancer rising? Just Google it like everybody else:

"Why are more men getting breast cancer?Additional risk factors for male breast cancer include obesity, older age, radiation exposure, a family history of breast cancer, overdeveloped breast tissue (or gynecomastia), exposure to estrogen and heavy alcohol use".

But, to follow your route for this part only, if they were correctly recorded as women, not men, at the point of treatment, they'd not fall into/under the figure of men with breast cancer. They'd be recorded as women with breast cancer.

They aren't women. To record them as women would skew the cancer figures for women and also hide that men who take estrogen have a greatly increased cancer risk - which is detrimental to preventing/understanding cancer risk in such men.

Means you screwed up again.

No, it means I said it depends how trusts record the data. IC has kindly explained it for us.

If you record data by gender identity not sex - which is what you want - it has negative outcomes. You might get the wrong medical treatment or not be called for a scan for example, or the data you have collected is useless because it is isn't accurate.


https://www.personneltoday.com/hr/sullivan-review-sex-data-gender/

 

[icowden]

If you record data by gender identity not sex - which is what you want - it has negative outcomes. You might get the wrong medical treatment or not be called for a scan for example, or the data you have collected is useless because it is isn't accurate.

Which is why it's recorded with an indicator. That way if your research is into biological men and women you have a clear definition but you can also do research into transmen and transwomen.

 

[CXRAndy]

Never heard such rubbish
XX female
XY male

Black discrimination, because those countries are way way behind in testing

Trans never won anything at any level



View: https://x.com/TheOnlyGuru/status/1904584182677815652?t=l76DX7n7ilcdY07bDGxfpg&s=19

 

[monkers]

Which is why it's recorded with an indicator. That way if your research is into biological men and women you have a clear definition but you can also do research into transmen and transwomen.

Oh you and your facts. AS will only move the goalposts or segway into another tired trope about trans people.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Pretty much every single thing in that Willoughby video is factually incorrect. For drug testing athletes have to pee in a bottle in front of someone; the urine has to be seen leaving your body. Nobody suggests sports shouldn't drug test because such tests are humiliating.

Sussex Uni hit with £500k fine for failing to uphold free speech and academic freedom after an inquiry spawned by the treatment of Prof Kathleen Stock.

https://archive.is/2025.03.25-190526/https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b

 

[monkers]

@icowden

Told you.

 

[AuroraSaab]

No tropes there, just facts and yet another news story that shows how tired people are getting of all the gender identity bs and the No Debate demands of activists. It was you that resurrected the thread so don't moan when people add to it.

 

[CXRAndy]

Come on Monkers.

What do you have to say about the video here https://ncap.cyclechat.net/threads/gender-again-sorry.273/post-114576

 

[monkers]

Pretty much every single thing in that Willoughby video is factually incorrect. For drug testing athletes have to pee in a bottle in front of someone; the urine has to be seen leaving your body. Nobody suggests sports shouldn't drug test because such tests are humiliating.

Sussex Uni hit with £500k fine for failing to uphold free speech and academic freedom after an inquiry spawned by the treatment of Prof Kathleen Stock.

https://archive.is/2025.03.25-190526/https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b

What you've managed to argue is that the public opinion of the students has been over-ruled by a regulator. This while arguing that your opinion is majority public opinion and should lead to a change in the law. Entirely hypocritical.

You've also argued about bathroom privacy and the dignity of women while at the same time saying that officials must watch athletes piss, and you seem happy about that.

It's also possible that the regulator's fine could lead to a court case.

See also recent joint statement in landmark ruling.

 

[CXRAndy]

What you've managed to argue is that the public opinion of the students has been over-ruled by a regulator. This while arguing that your opinion is majority public opinion and should lead to a change in the law. Entirely hypocritical.

You've also argued about bathroom privacy and the dignity of women while at the same time saying that officials must watch athletes piss, and you seem happy about that.

It's also possible that the regulator's fine could lead to a court case.

See also recent joint statement in landmark ruling.

The pee-ing is for drug cheats.

You can get sex from cheeky swab

 

[monkers]

Sussex Uni hit with £500k fine for failing to uphold free speech and academic freedom after an inquiry spawned by the treatment of Prof Kathleen Stock.

https://archive.is/2025.03.25-190526/https://www.ft.com/content/d39f0db7-877a-4cf3-8c12-dd5581eecd0b

Regulator says one thing, court says another ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lpy95y089o

 

[AuroraSaab]

What you've managed to argue is that the public opinion of the students has been over-ruled by a regulator. This while arguing that your opinion is majority public opinion and should lead to a change in the law. Entirely hypocritical.

I haven't argued anything. I am pleased the regulator has acknowledged that Sussex Uni failed to ensure academic freedom for its staff and students by giving more weight to the views of trans activists than to those who disagreed with them.

You've also argued about bathroom privacy and the dignity of women while at the same time saying that officials must watch athletes piss, and you seem happy about that.

The drug tests came about because athletes were cheating and submitting other people's urine. I agree with it because it's the price you pay for fairness in sports. A cheek swab is the same. Pretty sure the women athletes don't have to pee in front of a male official btw.

 

[AuroraSaab]

Regulator says one thing, court says another ...

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c1lpy95y089o

That's a very different thing altogether from academic freedom in a university. Your gaslighting attempts this morning are epic.