Gender Critical Resources thread/help with argument(21 Posts)
Can anyone help me find the thread/s with GC info/ reports / articles etc. on? Had a search but not finding it (sorry). Just preparing myself for a big debate. I was specifically thinking about something to back up:-
- reasons why stonewall stats are questionable e.g. trans suicides, being victims of violence more than other groups
- proof that 80-90% TIM's don't make any bodily changes
- also a thread/resources explaining why self id is not just a 'admin' issue. The more I read on the legal side the more confused I seem to get as lots of info seems v contradictory
I.e. are the biggest impacts of the self id law about the cultural changes where services will bring in unisex facilities and women won't be able to challenge men in female spaces for fear of being accused of a hate crime?
Thanks in advance for any help/advice x
as a start, not all of what you wanted, but t is late for me
How the suicide stats were falsified;
''The survey recruited 2,078 people of all sexualities and genders. The majority of those 2,078 people were not transgender.
When analysing the responses relating to suicidal ideation the study only looked at respondents under the age of 26. This reduced the sample size to 485 people. Of these, 27 identified themselves as trans*. That’s TWENTY SEVEN.
Not 2,000 trans people, 58% of whom had considered suicide, but 27 trans people, 15 of whom had considered suicide.''
Fair Play for Women is excellent on the legal stuff.
Some statistics about surgery from LGBT magazine The Advocate;
The Human Rights Campaign has launched a new series of online videos aptly titled "Debunking the Myths: Transgender Health & Well-Being"
The first video, "Myth #1: Surgery is a Top Priority for All Transgender People," addresses the false notion that gender-confirming surgeries are essential to every transgender person's identity. In reality, only 33 percent of transgender people have reported undergoing some form of gender-confirming surgery...''
(Breast implants and facial feminisation surgery are classed as gender-confirming surgery.)
Happy to share these - would love if you would send me a copy of your finished writeup as have been meaning to do one and keep getting other priorities:
1. This 2 minute clip of Ray Blanchard and Shon Faye shows the former blowing up the latter's claims of 48% trans suicide rate - might be a good idea to contact Ray Blanchard as he is obviously across the research
2. The 86% of TIMs don't have body changes - source PhilsXwingAccount from Reddit:
Plastic surgeons performed more than 3,250 operations to help people physically confirm their genders in 2016
An estimated 1.4 million transgender people live in the US
"Roughly a third of trans folks have undergone some gender-transition related surgery," McBride wrote in an email to Business Insider. "14 percent of trans women and 21 percent of trans men say they are never interested in having surgery, but its difficult to say exactly where the remaining sixty-ish percent are in terms of desire for surgery."
Keep in mind (1) the last quote was a quote of a quote and not actual data and (2) many men only get breast implants while keeping their penis.
I don't know if it will be relevant for your debate but I think it's worth remembering that the Stonewall report 'A Vision for Change' doesn't just call for GRA reform. They also want Equality Act reform. While this is not currently on the table it's important to place TRAs demands in this context. Many object to the current exemptions allowed in the EA - for example not allowing natal males to work in a rape crisis centre even if they have a GRC i.e. are legally female. They are therefore being extremely disingenuous when they state in debate -as they often do - "ah but the Equality Act will make sure X, Y or Z can't happen"
Stonewall's report is below
Taken from a couple of posts I made on another thread (some of it more relevant to you than other parts).
The Samaritans stress the that there should be a focus on local suicide prevention. With co-ordination and prioritisation of suicide prevention activity, particularly targeting areas with high levels of socio-economic deprivation. And that there should be responsible portrayal of suicide in the media.
They also stress the following:
Be careful of small groups/populations
The size of populations should be considered when looking at suicide rates. Smaller populations often produce rates that are less reliable as the rates per 100,000 are based on small numbers. Therefore, differences in the number of suicides may have a bigger impact on the rate than in a larger population. An example of this might be suicide in older people (eg over 80 years), as the population size is lower than in younger age groups
(Note here that the size of the population over 80 is much bigger than the trans community and they say this population size is small enough to cause problems with suicide rates).
and of course the obligatory:
Sensitive and responsible reporting of suicide
When talking about suicide publically or in the media, it is crucial to do so sensitively and responsibly, to minimise the risk of contagion (a phenomenon of suicidal behaviours that seems to occur as a result of previous suicides or attempts by others). Samaritans’ Media Guidelines provide advice for journalists about how to do this. These guidelines are often most related to reporting of occurrences of suicides, however, the principles of these guidelines should be followed for the reporting of suicide statistics and particularly when reporting on increases of suicides in particular groups.
Their report has some other really cracking points to consider when talking about suicide
The Samaritans also talk about how the rate of suicide is recorded. This is pretty significant, because there is a difference between the sexes in how they attempt suicide.
It is commonly acknowledged within the field of suicide research and prevention that official statistics underestimate the ‘true’ number (and, therefore, rate) of suicide.
One of the main reasons for the under-reporting of suicide is the misclassification of deaths. This means that the cause of death is coded as something other than suicide. An example of this is where a coroner cannot establish whether there was intent by the individual to take their own life. Consequently, the cause of death may be recorded as one of ‘undetermined intent’ or ‘accidental’. This may occur in situations where the death involved a road traffic accident or is long-term illness. It could also be difficult to determine whether there was intent to die in situations of self harm leading to suicide.
The difference in methods of suicide between males and females is discussed by many researchers historically: males seem to choose more ‘final’ and ‘obvious’ methods than females. It may be that in methods more commonly used by females, the intent cannot be determined (or assumed) as easily as in methods more common to males. This may, in part, explain some of the variation in rates between the genders, as there may be more under-reporting of suicidal deaths in females.
Let me repeat here:
They are saying that female suicides are perhaps more likely to be coded as accidental or undetermined intent due to the methods chosen rather than classified as suicides.
Let me note here again:
Traditionally women have been twice as likely to attempt suicide than men, but men were four times more likely to actually succeed in killing themselves.
They stress that there is a lack of research into the reliability of suicide statistics and that there were lots of other factors that lead to inconsistencies in data, nationally, regionally and from coroner to coroner. They point to whether like for like is actually being compared and whether coroner verdicts indicate intent or not, taking into account cultural or social sensitivities. (They are often open to subjectivity and interpretation for this reason).
Reliability is affected by the multiple definitions of suicide. Silverman suggested that a decade ago, there were more than 27 definitions of suicide used in the research literature. Today, the problem of defining and classifying suicide and suicidal behaviours in research is still a problem which hinders our understanding of the subject
In short, the Samaritans say just how hard it is to compare suicide rates and the degree to which they are open to interpretation abuse. And they say that, there is a difference between males and females, which is likely to lead to under reporting, particularly in women.
And having read the Samaritans stuff, I'd argue that because there is a cultural lean towards the idea that trans people are more likely to attempt suicide, that also lends itself to coroners perhaps being more likely, not less likely, to record a death as suicide because there isn't a taboo there but a social expectation.
I could be wrong about this, but the Samaritans in making the point that coroners are free to make narrative verdicts or to omit suicide from a verdict due to cultural or family sensitivities, by default could mean the converse if a family want / expect a verdict of suicide.
Not only have you got a potential social contagion for someone to take those actions in the first place, you've also got a bias as to how actions will be interpreted afterwards, which isn't the same as the general population.
RedToothBrush that is excellent! Very informative.
I'd like to add that suicide researchers when looking into suicide rates have found that when they follow up with survey respondents who said they had attempted suicide the actual number who did is typically half that of those who said they did.
I looked into another suicide rate stated by the Equality and Human Rights Commission Trans Research Review (published 2009). Based on a 2007 survey of 872 trans people they stated that 34.4% had attempted suicide at least once.
When I checked out the actual survey, it turned out the question was
Have you ever self-harmed OR attempted suicide
So 34.4% said yes to that question but there was no differentiation between self-harm and suicide attempts in the actual survey. Therefore the claim of a suicide attempt rate of 34.4% is entirely unjustified.
Maybe 99% of the people who answered yes had self-harmed, maybe 99% had attempted suicide, maybe it was 50/50. But there's no way of knowing because the researchers didn't answer a more specific question. They also did not follow up with those respondents answering yes as suicide researchers are wont to do.
While gender dysphoric people undoubtedly suffer severe mental health issues, the statistics are unreliable. For various reasons.
And the fact that trans people are often suicidal not because they are trans but due to comorbidity with other mental health disorders cannot be ignored either.
There is a great list of resources here (scroll down to find a section which might help
Thanks so much for all of your replies! Lots of incredibly useful resources to work through - you're all fab! The reason I was asking is that I'm informing my "comrades" that I'm resigning from Labour as the mayday thing happens next week. Want to back up my reasons with decent references and I'm expecting a bit of a shit storm so best to be prepared!
RedToothBrush - very interesting, thank you.
Also I would add that, in tracking DV femicides/deaths, there are a number of female deaths being ruled as suicide/accidental, when I would have suspicion that they were in fact, DV femicides.
Best of luck Lefty99
Thanks again everyone. It went quite well not much debate re: the actual issue. Lots of trying to convince me to stay. Glad it's nearly over, roll on Mayday! Will be bookmarking this thread for future reference, so very helpful.
Good luck with your debate. This thread has lots of resources:
There is another brilliant thread somewhere on here where the OP sets out a huge range of resources catorgerised by topic. I've had a search but can't find it. Maybe someone else remembers it?
Oh just realised the debate has already been! Well done for debating.
BeUpStanding thanks so much for your reply - that is really helpful and I will bookmark myself as I'm sure I'll be needing it again!
A couple of Youtubers
Showed my mum the video 'what is a terf' and it peaked her instantly.
Rose of Dawn
Transexual woman speaking about her anger with the transcult co-opting gender dysphoria to push their gender radical ideology.
She's approaching from a libertairan, centrist position and makes lots of very good points about dangers to free speech.
Tonight on Channel 4 at 10pm
Channel 4 is holding a studio discussion, Genderquake: The Debate where a wide-ranging panel of guests with a variety of views will look at what gender means in 2018. The debate, which is part of a wider season on gender, will discuss topics including: what defines our gender identity, how that affects our rights, should it be easier to change gender and does gender matter anyway?
The debate will be hosted by Channel 4 News’ Cathy Newman and the panellists will include model and activist Munroe Bergdorf, leading feminist and academic Germaine Greer and US Television personality and Olympic gold medal winner Caitlyn Jenner. There will also be other panellists and speakers with a wide range of views.
Shaminder Nahal, Channel 4 Commissioning Editor said:
“This debate will stimulate important and insightful discussion with a wide variety of views from the panel and audience. Issues around gender now have a prominent position in the national conversation, with strong feeling on all sides. Channel 4 is well known for exploring challenging and emotive issues in a fair and balanced way and with this programme we want to help audiences understand and engage in these multi-faceted issues.”
Gaby Hinsliff article in The Guardian has balance and discusses the wider context including WPUK, WEP and perspectives of people who are transgender.
I think it is worth reading and sharing.
thread discussing article:
Join the discussion
Registering is free, quick, and means you can join in the discussion, watch threads, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.Get started »
Please login first.