Transwomen are not Women - Part 15

[Ziggurat]

And you are pedantically repeating the obvious

I have no idea what's obvious to you. Your posts show little consistency, and I cannot tell at all what the reasoning process behind any of them is. So if I'm occasionally telling you things that you don't already know, it may be because I have no idea what you already know.

 

[Thermal]

I have no idea what's obvious to you. Your posts show little consistency, and I cannot tell at all what the reasoning process behind any of them is. So if I'm occasionally telling you things that you don't already know, it may be because I have no idea what you already know.

"You are confused." Totally believe you.

 

[Ziggurat]

I want to be accepting and all, but the "I'm not anything!" bull ◊◊◊◊ gets on my last nerve.

But god forbid I should call any of that "weird".

 

[Thermal]

But god forbid I should call any of that "weird".

You want to talk about weird identities? I'm down. You want to talk about weird sexualities (in context seeming to mean anything but hetero), I gots a problem.

 

[Emily's Cat]

P(R|M) << P(M|R)

P(R|M) = P(M|R).P(R) / P(M) = P(M|R).P(R) / [ P(M|R).P(R) + P(M|~R).P(~R) ]

P(M|R) ~ 0.98; P(M|~R) = ?; P(R) = ?

What is R and M?

Making a wild assumption that R = Rapist and M = Male

If my assumption is true, then you start out by saying that the probability of a person being a rapist given that the person is male is much smaller than the probability of a person being male given that the person is a rapist.

Then bayesian math... and I'm not going to try to turn that into words.

My assumption would seem to be born out by your conclusion that P(M|R) ~ 0.98; we already know that 98% of rapists are males.

Exact answers for the remainder are hard to come by, but they're also not complete unknowns. We have some knowledge and we can make some assumptions. We know for example that P(M|~R) < 0.5. We could arguably say that P(M) = 0.49 if we limit our scope to the US.

And we can proxy P(R). The 2016 National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which measures sexual assaults and rapes that may not have been reported to the police, estimated that there were 431,840 incidents of rape or sexual assault in 2015. With a population of about 320,000,000 in 2015, that puts P(R) at 0.135. Thus P(~R) = 0.865.

So we've got P(M|R) = 0.98, P(M) = 0.49, P(R) = 0.135.
P(R|M) = P(M|R).P(R) / P(M) = 0.98 * 0.135/0.49 = 0.27

That would imply that any given male has a 27% chance of being a rapist. That seems high, so let's make the extreme simplifying assumption that the 431,840 instances or rape were committed by only 43,184 males - that would mean that each rapist raped 10 people in 2015, which seems rather high, but we can treat that as a boundary scenario. That would mean that P(R) is more like 0.0135, and we end up with 0.027.

So for any given male, there's between a 2.7% and a 27% chance that they're a rapist.

 

[Emily's Cat]

What are the unreasonable accommodations for transsexual women that I advocate for?

How does advocating for such things as reducing economic inequality, ending childhood poverty and early intervention, which we know results in nicer, better behaved humans of all ethnicities and sexualities come at the expense of women? The only group it comes at the expense of is very wealthy and (mostly) white men and their acolytes such as yourself.

So... Norway is generally considered to have very low economic inequality, very low poverty rates, and very high educational rates. I challenge you to find a country that better fits the description of what you think would address rapes and violence against females.

Doesn't really seem to have fixed the issue.

Violence and rape in Norway. A national prevalence study with a life course perspective. - NKVTS English

Background Violence in close relationships is a burden to the individual and to society. The use of violence is prohibited by Norwegian law and in conflict with human rights. Physical violence and sexual abuse, as well as psychological violence, have negative consequences in terms of health...

www.nkvts.no

 

[Emily's Cat]

Biological sex, as it is defined, is pretty much binary. What you refuse or just simply cannot conceive of is that the vast majority of human self-identity has little to do with biological sex.

What you refuse or simply cannot conceive of is that the spaces and services we're talking about are separated on the basis of sex to address disparate experiences that occur on the basis of sex, and are driven by evolved differences in the sexes.

Self-identity has absolutely nothing at all to do with why I and many other would like restrooms, changing rooms, showers, spas, prisons, athletics, rape shelters, domestic violence refuges, and other similar types of spaces and services to continue being separated on the basis of sex... and why we do not think that self-identity should give any person the legal right to transgress those sex-based boundaries.

 

[Emily's Cat]

Is your solution to burglary bigger locks on doors?

Essentially, yes. I wouldn't say "bigger" but certainly better.

Most of the decreases in crime over the past decade or so have been the result of better security, not the result of any change in underlying tendency toward criminality. Reduction in auto thefts, for example, have been driven by improvements in locking mechanisms, lo-jack and similar tracking mechanisms, increased prevalence of alarm systems, dash cams, and other means of risk avoidance.

 

[Ziggurat]

You want to talk about weird identities? I'm down. You want to talk about weird sexualities (in context seeming to mean anything but hetero), I gots a problem.

Do you now?

You guys have more colorful acquaintances than me, I guess.

If a guy told me he was nonbinary, with a non binary oppisite sex partner, and wanted to be called a gay couple, I would sit him down on the couch with a relaxing cup of tea, bring out a dictionary, sit next to him on the couch, and beat him into the ICU with the dictionary.

I want to be accepting and all, but the "I'm not anything!" bull ◊◊◊◊ gets on my last nerve.

So you feel like physically assaulting someone over this, but calling it weird is a bridge too far for you.

And isn't it weird? You don't have to make a value judgement to recognize when something is far outside the normal range.

 

[Emily's Cat]

For the same reason: I think (very broadly) that women are more compassionate and perform intimate caregiving work with more sensitivity than most men. That may be a throwback to my mom, wife, EMTs, nurses, etc very intuitively caring for children and the sick/injured than my clumsy male attempts.

I will submit that most females want to be physically inspected and intimately handled by females because a whole lot of males get sexually aroused by touching female bodies, and we don't want to be handled by a stranger with a hard-on.

Because there have been tons and tons and tons of documented cases of males taking liberties with females in situations like this. Anything from the TSA agent being a bit too handsy while checking for an underwire and copping a feel to the EMT spending more time than needed "checking" a busty female's heart rate with their entire hand spanning a boob (happened to me, and I wasn't even unconscious or anything) to an anesthesiologist putting his dick in an unconscious female patient's mouth during prep, to any number of other violations.

 

[Emily's Cat]

No. My position is the same as I've repeated over and over and over. I know they are bio males. I think of them /treat them as more like women. I believe I've said this a few dozen times.

Ahh. Would you like to amend your prior statement then? You said:

The group, if you mean males, demands no access whatsoever. A small fraction of a percent that feels they are women do.

Would you prefer to say "Some of the group demands access", given that at least some males absolutely DO demand access?

 

[Emily's Cat]

If she performs strip searches professionally, why would she object? It's not a sexual thing. Unless you're suggesting it *is*, and she only wants to feel up other women? That's weird.

Dude, seriously. A LOT of males are pretty goddamned pervy, and you ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ know it so stop pretending it's not a thing. A lot of males will absolutely get off on having their dicks touched by a female, even when it's not supposed to be a sexual thing. Why do you think that the female attendant should be FORCED to provide sexual titillation to a male?

 

[Emily's Cat]

Read harder. The question asked if I had a choice. I presumed the searcher would not object. If she did, where the ◊◊◊◊ do you come up with the logic that the one impersonally performing their paid work has a choice, but the recipient doesn't?

Sometimes I think you're ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with all of us.

Here's the way it works in reality: You have the right to be searched by someone of the same sex; you don't have the right to be searched by someone of the opposite sex.

 

[smartcooky]

<polite snip>

So for any given male, there's between a 2.7% and a 27% chance that they're a rapist.

To put it in terms of the debate here...

For every time a woman and transgender identified man are in the same restroom, there is between a 1 in 30 and a 1 in 3 chance she is in there with a rapist. Its probably much higher that that, because we know, for a fact, that the rate of sexual offending among transgender identified men is at least three times higher than for non-transgender identified men.

 

[Emily's Cat]

You want to talk about weird identities? I'm down. You want to talk about weird sexualities (in context seeming to mean anything but hetero), I gots a problem.

That's a you thing.

My nephew is a gay male who likes to dress up as a horse with a dildo up his butt. That's what gets them off. My nephew is a great guy, but their sexuality is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ weird.

 

[Thermal]

Ahh. Would you like to amend your prior statement then? You said:


Would you prefer to say "Some of the group demands access", given that at least some males absolutely DO demand access?

No, fot the same reason that if I said "Adult Americans don't support having gay sex with children", that'd a true and accurate statement. "American NAMBLA members want this" is the qualified statement.

 

[Thermal]

Dude, seriously. A LOT of males are pretty goddamned pervy, and you ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ know it so stop pretending it's not a thing. A lot of males will absolutely get off on having their dicks touched by a female, even when it's not supposed to be a sexual thing. Why do you think that the female attendant should be FORCED to provide sexual titillation to a male?

I don't think she should. Why do you ask? I think that if she took a job requiring her to perform strip searches, she maybe should have considered that beforehand.

And here you are again not acknowledging homosexuality. Not exactly a fraction of a percent of the population, as trans people are. Has it occurred to you that only allowing a same sex strip search might be just what a pervy gay person would want? I don't hear any righteous indignation for them being screamed about.

 

[Thermal]

That's a you thing.

My nephew is a gay male who likes to dress up as a horse with a dildo up his butt. That's what gets them off. My nephew is a great guy, but their sexuality is ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ weird.

Good for him. Live and let live. Not the topic here. This one is... wait, it's on the tip of my tongue... oh, yeah: identities.

 

[Ziggurat]

I don't think she should. Why do you ask? I think that if she took a job requiring her to perform strip searches, she maybe should have considered that beforehand.

Certain jobs require female employees to strip search females. It has NOT usually been the case that these jobs required female employees to strip search males. Can you understand why these employees would not want such a change in their job duties? Can you understand why why should not create such a change in their job duties?

And here you are again not acknowledging homosexuality.

Here you are thinking it's only about sexual attraction, rather than acknowledging a biological component.

 

[Thermal]

Sometimes I think you're ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with all of us.

I know damn right well y'all are ◊◊◊◊◊◊◊ with me. There's a lot of playing dumb coming from your side that has zero credibility.

Here's the way it works in reality: You have the right to be searched by someone of the same sex; you don't have the right to be searched by someone of the opposite sex.

Pretty please, read it again. I was asked hypothetically, which I would choose if given the choice. As we all know, I am.mot given one "in reality".

Serious question: after three repetitions, you are still claiming to be "confused". I know you are sharp. So why the act?