TERFs crash London Pride

[luchog]

She was talking about the UK homicide rates, and that's not cherry picking.

Except that when that was posted, it was not said that it referred exclusively to UK residents; nor did anything else explicitly limit this to UK residents. It wasn't until the facts got in their way did they start limiting the data to UK residents, cherry picking the data that they thought supported their assertions (it doesn't, because UK crime reporting, like crime reporting elsewhere in the world, has commonly misgendered transgender victims).

 

[caveman1917]

You're the only anti-capitalist "TERF" I've encountered.

Which is pretty meaningless unless you compare with the total number of anti-capitalists and the total number of gender-critical people (probably better than "TERF") you've encountered.

 

[caveman1917]

UK crime reporting, like crime reporting elsewhere in the world, has commonly misgendered transgender victims.

Got any evidence for that? How many have they misgendered, exactly? And why aren't you complaining to the Trans-advocacy groups maintaining the data sets (3 independent ones all agreeing with each other at that) that they didn't include those? After all, if you have access to the evidence of those other transgender victims who were misgendered then so do they, and they should've included them, no?

 

[kellyb]

Which is pretty meaningless unless you compare with the total number of anti-capitalists and the total number of gender-critical people (probably better than "TERF") you've encountered.

I doubt Rolfe's anti-capitalism, and I don't think JJ is.
I know several trans-critical(ish) feminists irl and from elsewhere on the webbernet. They're all raging economic neoliberals.

 

[luchog]

You're citing Mumsnet?

Really?

Wow....

Woos do tend to stick together, after all. See below.

We've already seen that even when a research paper is peer-reviewed and published in a reputable journal, attacks from trans-activists can force the journal and the researcher's university to repudiate the study, on the ground that it seems to upset trans people.

Thank you for illustrating my point so effectively. Conspiracy-theory woo FTW.

Like I said, keep going, there's no laughing stock like 'Murican deluded liberals thinking themselves progressive and leftist and stuff. Let me guess, nasa.gov is also a bigoted hate site for presenting evidence that the Earth isn't flat?

Qod est demonstrandum.

I think it's a nice illustration of the marketplace of ideas, where the ideas most profitable for capital accumulation rise the top. Current-day gender ideology is quite profitable to capital in various ways, whereas left-wing critiques of gender are quite unprofitable to capital (in no small part because they invariably come with critiques of capitalism).

Oh I really want to see you try and support this. Transpeople are some of the most anti-capitalist people who exist, and there is nothing in conformist-mandating capitalist culture that is in any way supportive of transpeople, and most of it is highly repressive.

But do, please, try. Should be good for a laugh.

 

[kellyb]

It wasn't until the facts got in their way did they start limiting the data to UK residents, cherry picking the data that they thought supported their assertions (it doesn't, because UK crime reporting, like crime reporting elsewhere in the world, has commonly misgendered transgender victims).

It looks to me like she was making the claim based on the UK data she was familiar with.

 

[caveman1917]

I doubt Rolfe's anti-capitalism, and I don't think JJ is.
I know several trans-critical(ish) feminists irl and from elsewhere on the webbernet. They're all raging economic neoliberals.

Feminists how though, radical feminists? For example conservative christians are also trans-critical but not from a position of gender-criticism, quite the opposite.

 

[luchog]

It looks to me like she was making the claim based on the UK data she was familiar with.

She's intelligent enough to know that the UK is not representative of the entire world, so was either misrepresenting the facts, or misunderstood them. Further, given the other sweeping blanket statements that she and her supporters have been making in this and other thread on the subject, combined with her exclusive resort to multiple anti-trans hate and conspiracy-theory sources to support her own assertions make my highly suspicious that she was intended to refer only to the UK.

Sorry but no. Her post was a response to my comment noting that murders of transpeople are up worldwide, in some places rising precipitously. Her response was to make a blanket statement that murders of transpeople were no more common per-capita than murders in general, and then link to a site that relied on heavily-manipulated data restricted to the UK. That's neither a valid response nor an honest mistake. That's a common tactic of woos of all stripes, from homeopaths to religious fundamentalists to flat-earthers. We don't accept and excuse it from them, and I for one don't accept or excuse it from her.

Remember, this is from someone who has stated numerous times in this thread, including one post just a few above this one, that she believes that governments, prestigious scientific organizations and journals, and the most reliable journalistic outlets in the world are being controlled by a shadowy cabal of trans activists to suppress The Truth about how transpeople are trying to destroy women, particularly lesbians.

Go back and read some of the links she posted earlier in the thread if you don't believe me. They read like any foaming religious fundamentalist rant on homosexuals, or white nationalist screed on Jews.

 

[kellyb]

We've already seen that even when a research paper is peer-reviewed and published in a reputable journal, attacks from trans-activists can force the journal and the researcher's university to repudiate the study, on the ground that it seems to upset trans people.

I've become a bit disillusioned by the quality of debate in this forum since the heady days of the early 2000s when we were shredding people with unscientific beliefs, but I'm still rather startled it's got as bad as this.

If you're talking about the PLOS article, Brown University says:

https://news.brown.edu/articles/2018/08/gender

Given the concerns about research design and methods — not the controversial nature of the subject — the University decided to stop featuring this news story on its news site. However, the research article is still available on the journal’s website and on the author’s Researchers @ Brown page.

1. This is not about academic freedom, as some news outlets have made it out to be. This faculty member — and, indeed, all Brown faculty members — have the right to conduct research on topics they choose. This is the case even for research that leads them into politically controversial territory. Brown gives its full support to this faculty member to conduct her research and publish her work.

 

[caveman1917]

Oh I really want to see you try and support this. Transpeople are some of the most anti-capitalist people who exist, and there is nothing in conformist-mandating capitalist culture that is in any way supportive of transpeople, and most of it is highly repressive.

Even just the first result to come up in a simple google search:

Along with support by pharmaceutical giants such as Janssen Therapeutics, the health foundation of a Johnson and Johnson founder, Viiv, Pfizer, Abbott Laboratories, Bristol-Myers Squibb Company, and Boehringer Ingelheim Pharmaceuticals, major technology corporations including Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Intel, Dell, and IBM are also funding the transgender project. In February 2017, Apple, Microsoft, Google, IBM, Yelp, PayPal, and 53 other mostly tech corporations signed onto an amicus brief pushing the U.S. Supreme Court to prohibit schools from keeping private facilities for students designated according to sex.

But do, please, try. Should be good for a laugh.

You always are indeed.

 

[deadrose]

Caveman, I'm confused. Are you saying those corporations are transpeople? Or are you saying that anyone supporting ungendered bathroom access is/are transpeople? If not, perhaps you could clarify your statement a bit as it's very confusing as it stands.

 

[caveman1917]

Caveman, I'm confused. Are you saying those corporations are transpeople? Or are you saying that anyone supporting ungendered bathroom access is/are transpeople? If not, perhaps you could clarify your statement a bit as it's very confusing as it stands.

luchog asserted that there is nothing in capitalism that is in any way supportive of transpeople. Which even a simple google search shows to be hilariously wrong, and that's even ignoring that the assertion was a strawman anyway.

 

[Information Analyst]

Let me guess, you're a liberal too?

No, I'm a socialist.

My screen name is also literally my job title, so I'll assume yours is, too.

 

[caveman1917]

My screen name is also literally my job title

I figured as much, that's why I took a jab at it - because you failed to analyze the given information correctly, in particular failing to account for the fact that - in as much as an appeal to venue is even much of an argument in the first place - it completely stops being relevant when the data can be verified independently of the venue.

so I'll assume yours is, too.

Sure, let's go with that.

 

[Information Analyst]

I figured as much, that's why I took a jab at it - because you failed to analyze the given information correctly, in particular failing to account for the fact that - in as much as an appeal to venue is even much of an argument in the first place - it completely stops being relevant when the data can be verified independently of the venue.

Except the "venue" for the cherry-picked opinion pieced was Mumsnet - a talking shop for bored and obsessive parents. That you think that's a reliable source is hilarious, and any attempt to repackage it makes it doubly hilarious.

 

[caveman1917]

Except the "venue" was Mumsnet - a talking shop for bored and obsessive parents. That you think that's a reliable source is hilarious.

They do give out these job titles like cookies these days, don't they? Mumsnet is irrelevant because, again, the information can be easily verified and the results reproduced using independent sources. When you claim that I think that's a reliable source you're just projecting your own inability to understand the concept of a source. And yes, it's hilarious - especially given the username - but not in the way you're probably thinking.

 

[kellyb]

Except the "venue" for the cherry-picked opinion pieced was Mumsnet - a talking shop for bored and obsessive parents. That you think that's a reliable source is hilarious, and any attempt to repackage it makes it doubly hilarious.

Whoever wrote it linked to their sources. You have to address the actual argument in this case and not the just trash the url.

 

[quadraginta]

<snip>

We've already seen that even when a research paper is peer-reviewed and published in a reputable journal, attacks from trans-activists can force the journal and the researcher's university to repudiate the study, on the ground that it seems to upset trans people.

<snip>

Andrew Wakefield's research paper claiming that the MMR vaccine caused autism was was published in the peer-reviewed Lancet, "among the world's oldest, most prestigious, and best known general medical journals".

It took six years before a partial retraction was issued by Lancet, after ten of the twelve co-authors removed their support, and six more before a full retraction was issued.

Anti-vaxers claimed it was forced into the retractions by Big Pharma.

 

[Darat]

Nope. Out of the 6 transgender people murdered between 2008 and 2016 3 were killed for being prostitutes (supporting JihadJane's first claim) and none were killed for being transgender. And the murder rate is lower than for women in general, supporting JihadJane's second claim.

How about you support your assertion that the data presented (which, I'll again point out, agrees with the data from two other independent sources which can be found through luchog's link) "pretty much demolish JilhadJane's claim"?

"Of the 317 murder victims, 102 had their professions recorded. About half of these were sex workers; a notoriously dangerous line of work."

 

[Information Analyst]

They do give out these job titles like cookies these days, don't they?

You haven't got a clue what my job entails, so your immature sarcasm is pointless.