• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

Cont: [ED] Discussion: Trans Women are not Women (Part 5)

Status
Not open for further replies.
theprestige said:
Section 2 of the report includes a list of data sources for this estimate. None of the data is sourced from surveys conducted by the ONS. Two of the sources, "Department for Work and Pensions - benefit claimant data" and "Her Majesty's Revenue and Customs - Child and Working Tax Credit data" seem like they could potentially generate questionable statistics unless the gender/sex question is properly accounted for by those agencies when they produce the data.
Click to expand...

What the ONS itself says:

7.UK data collection
Office for National Statistics (ONS) does not currently collect data on gender identity in any social surveys and there are no harmonised questions across the Government Statistical Service (GSS). However, data collection methodology and question designs are being explored. The Census White Paper: Help Shape Our Future recommended that there will be a question on gender identity (while keeping the existing question on sex) for those aged 16 years and over for the 2021 Census for England and Wales.
Click to expand...

https://www.ons.gov.uk/economy/environmentalaccounts/articles/whatisthedifferencebetweensexandgender/2019-02-21

DWP and HMRC data will be driven by NI numbers which are identified by sex. These of course can be changed with a GRC but the number issued is statistically insignificant at less than 400 per year.
 
Last edited:
Rolfe said:
The SNP plus the Greens have an absolute majority. The Greens are even more woke than the SNP. If they want it to pass, it will pass. There is a school of thought that another reason for withdrawing the amendment was to placate the Greens to secure their support for the SNP budget.

I live here sunshine. You worry about what Biden is planning.
Click to expand...

He should actually worry about what the Legislature is planning. The president can't do much on his own.
 
theprestige said:
It's only been a couple of weeks? Feels like longer. But okay, fair enough.

A few weeks ago, you didn't even know self-ID was on the table.

A couple weeks ago, you were saying it would never become policy.
Click to expand...

Perhaps I wasn't saying what you thought I was. I've known about self-ID since I argued about it being proposed in England, on Electric Agora, IIRC two or three years ago.
 
Collin237 said:
Perhaps I wasn't saying what you thought I was. I've known about self-ID since I argued about it being proposed in England, on Electric Agora, IIRC two or three years ago.
Click to expand...

Ah, I understand now. Thanks for the correction. Anyway, now that Rolfe has explained that it's literally the Scottish government proposing this new policy, what's your take on whether they Scottish government will ever implement this new policy they're proposing?
 
theprestige said:
Ah, I understand now. Thanks for the correction. Anyway, now that Rolfe has explained that it's literally the Scottish government proposing this new policy, what's your take on whether they Scottish government will ever implement this new policy they're proposing?
Click to expand...

I know it sounds apocalyptic but... my guess is it will be passed, and then the English army will "liberate" them from it.
 
Collin237 said:
This is like Charlotte's Web. Its impact comes from how improbable it is. If you saw it out of context, you'd assume it's someone pointing out an alleged entryist scheme of their opponent. Instead, you're seeing it in the context of someone recommending it for their own organization. The cognitive dissonance leads you to perceive it as a disembodied fact, rather than a message that somebody is giving you.
Click to expand...

:confused:

I think we might need to revisit Occam's Razor sometime really soon.
 
Aber said:
DWP and HMRC data will be driven by NI numbers which are identified by sex. These of course can be changed with a GRC but the number issued is statistically insignificant at less than 400 per year.
Click to expand...

I get what you're saying. What happens though if the police are recording a person's gender identity as their sex on official documents? Thus a person in a dress that says they are a woman gets recorded as "F" regardless of them actually being observably physically male.
 
Emily's Cat said:
To what end? This doesn't really make sense to me. Can you explain your reasoning more completely?
Click to expand...

I still think that the appearance of so many trans people is probably caused by environmental chemicals. And I think that some big laboratory, like CERN or something, has found scientific evidence for this, and industries throughout the world are doing whatever they can to distract everyone.
 
I find the thing with the cops so weird because the stilted way they talk, like they're writing in a notebook, tends to say things like "a male was apprehended..." when most people would say man.
 
Collin237 said:
I still think that the appearance of so many trans people is probably caused by environmental chemicals. And I think that some big laboratory, like CERN or something, has found scientific evidence for this, and industries throughout the world are doing whatever they can to distract everyone.
Click to expand...

First, CERN does particle physics, not biology. Second, this is underpants gnome theory.
 
A question about this GRC stuff..

From what I understand if a transgender person gets this, they are able to permanently alter their past legal documents such as for a marriage or their own birth. (while other documents can be done without any grc)

But does that mean that my own record of being married or giving birth could be altered to say I gave birth to a different sex of child (including giving the child a different name than I did) or that I married a woman at the registrar when in fact I married a man in a church?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom