• 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.

Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

Status
Not open for further replies.
Adding all of these to my reading list but what was the book mentioned at #3278?

Nevermind I've got it now, thx Elaedith.
 
Last edited:
I can't see how this whole bubble won't burst within a few years, becoming a historical scandal within practicing medicine.

It has all the necessary ingredients.


It always takes longer than you think. But yes. I think the people pushing this have over-reached themselves and with any luck they might suffer a significant backlash.

I posted this thread earlier but it's pages back now. It's re-imagining what's going on, but with body integrity disorder instead of this gender thing. It immediately highlights the enormity of what's going on, by removing it from the "wrong-sexed soul" claptrap.

https://twitter.com/_CryMiaRiver/status/1624443564884123652
 
Last edited:
Oh bloody hell. ANOTHER one.

New York nanny who killed two children sentenced to life in prison without parole

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news...-new-york-nanny-killed-two-children-sentenced

Now of course it's obviously only fair to point out that not all ciswomen stab to death 6-year-old and 4-year-old children in their care. It would be absolutely wrong to make that sort of claim. But you've got to ask yourself: should parents really take the chance of leaving ciswomen in charge of their kids, if this is what might happen?
 
I think it is fair to say we should not generalize from news stories when crime statistics are readily available.

Do you support recording birth sex in the crime stats data?
 
It always takes longer than you think. But yes. I think the people pushing this have over-reached themselves and with any luck they might suffer a significant backlash.

I posted this thread earlier but it's pages back now. It's re-imagining what's going on, but with body integrity disorder instead of this gender thing. It immediately highlights the enormity of what's going on, by removing it from the "wrong-sexed soul" claptrap.

https://twitter.com/_CryMiaRiver/status/1624443564884123652


If the actual medical experts ever decide they've got it wrong about transgender identity being a valid condition (as opposed to it being a mental health disorder), I'm sure they'll be good enough to let the non-experts (including all those who seem to be convinced they're experts when in reality they're anything but) know. No need to concern yourself with it until & unless that happens.
 
If the actual medical experts ever decide they've got it wrong about transgender identity being a valid condition (as opposed to it being a mental health disorder), I'm sure they'll be good enough to let the non-experts know.
Care to quote an actual medical expert drawing this same distinction?

Last I checked, gender dysphoria remains a diagnosable condition, and we've yet to see any comments from the relevant experts on what it means to have a transgender identity apart from this condition. This makes sense, because why would medical experts comment on something which requires no medical attention?
 
Last edited:
I think it is fair to say we should not generalize from news stories when crime statistics are readily available.


Has it entirely escaped your notice that various anti-transgender-identity posters in this thread are engaging in precisely the same sleight-of-hand?



Do you support recording birth sex in the crime stats data?


Do you support recording sexuality of the offender in the crime stats data?
 
Care to quote an actual medical expert drawing this same distinction? Last I checked, gender dysphoria is a diagnosable condition.


Seriously? You still think that "gender dysphoria" is synonymous with "transgender identity"?

If you're all too willing to spout bollocks such as this, it may be a good idea to do some research into the subject matter first. You've been engaging on this subject for long enough, for heaven's sake.


(Gender dysphoria is indeed a diagnosable mental health condition, in which a person is negatively affected by their gender identity being different from their sex assigned at birth. Not all people with transgender identity ever suffer from gender dysphoria. And once a person transitions, it's commonplace for their gender dysphoria to disappear. This is basic, basic stuff. I guess ideology can put up pretty firm barriers to knowledge and education, huh?)
 
If the questions are reductive and ignorant, then why not?

Lol. You think asking whether we should record birth sex in crime statistics is 'reductive and ignorant', when sex recorded at birth is the single most important variable relevant to criminal behaviour (as opposed to 'gender identity' which appears to have no relevance).
 
I think it is fair to say we should not generalize from news stories when crime statistics are readily available.


Actual crime stats (correlated with census data), mentioned a few times but never commented on.

In England and Wales, transwomen are imprisoned for sex offences at over 565 times the rate of women. In fact there are almost as many transwomen imprisoned for sexual offences (92) as there are women imprisoned for the same category of offences (103), despite the enormous difference in the size of the respective populations. (Almost all women convicted of sex offences have offended against a child victim who is known to them. They are offences committed within the family. The number of women convicted of sex offences against adult strangers isn't going to make it out of single figures.)

Transwomen are in fact imprisoned for sex offences at about five times the rate of other men. You're far safer with a man who isn't LARPing womanhood than you are with one who is.

Do you support recording birth sex in the crime stats data?


Nobody has ever given a satisfactory answer as to why the recording of the sex of an offender (something readily observed and verified and immutable) was suddenly and without apparent discussion changed to "gender" (a feeling in someone's head, which many people claim not to have, which is impossible to verify and is acknowledged to be "fluid" in many people). All suggestions gratefully received.
 
Lol. You think asking whether we should record birth sex in crime statistics is 'reductive and ignorant', when sex recorded at birth is the single most important variable relevant to criminal behaviour (as opposed to 'gender identity' which appears to have no relevance).


Do you think the sexuality of offenders should be recorded?

Do you think the education standard of offenders should be recorded?

Do you think whether an offender came from a broken home should be recorded?


Jurisprudence not your strong suit, huh?
 
Nobody has ever given a satisfactory answer as to why the recording of the sex of an offender (something readily observed and verified and immutable) was suddenly and without apparent discussion changed to "gender" (a feeling in someone's head, which many people claim not to have, which is impossible to verify and is acknowledged to be "fluid" in many people). All suggestions gratefully received.

I can only assume LJ doesn't think gender should be recorded in crime stats either, since if there is no reason to record the single most important variable for prediction and risk assessment (sex) then there can hardly be any reason to record a variable that has not been shown to have any relevance to anything. Of course we could record both sex and gender identity, but we already know from data we have that offending patterns are related to sex and not changed by self-declared gender identity.
 
Do you think the sexuality of offenders should be recorded?

Do you think the education standard of offenders should be recorded?

Do you think whether an offender came from a broken home should be recorded?
Only if there are important reasons to do so.
Jurisprudence not your strong suit, huh?

If you think sex recorded at birth does not need recording in crime stats, I would say it's not yours.
 
Seriously? You still think that "gender dysphoria" is synonymous with "transgender identity"?
No, is think the former is well-defined in the DSM and the latter is not.

Perhaps you can quote an actual medical expert clearly drawing the distinction?
 
Last edited:
Your midnight check-in on the petition reports 81,199 signatures, so 1,029 new signatures today. Business was definitely brisk.

The new magic number is 280.6.
 
Last edited:
Care to quote an actual medical expert drawing this same distinction?

Last I checked, gender dysphoria remains a diagnosable condition, and we've yet to see any comments from the relevant experts on what it means to have a transgender identity apart from this condition. This makes sense, because why would medical experts comment on something which requires no medical attention?

Also, I wonder how we get from having a "valid condition" to being put on puberty blockers.

That would be spectacularly frivolous. But no, the article in fact talks about a very questionable diagnostic criteria, which already is very worrying.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom