Trans Women Should Be Allowed In Women Only Spaces

I agree materialist, my point has only been one thing - that your statistics that you keep using are not true, reliable facts.

I have said many times I don’t think it’s up to us to provide the data, nor have I disagreed that transwoman’ are more likely to offend at the same rate as men than woman. Nor have I said transwoman are biological woman.

I have merely been saying that the data everyone keeps using is not some kind of ‘gotya’ doesn’t prove anything. People seem so intent on refusing to admit that, that they’ve instead brushed over this and made several other points that are irrelevant to the discussion.
As the question was ‘where do you get your data/numbers from’

Btw data shows 125 transpeople in prison out of an estimated 600,000. This is 0.02% of the population. There are 4,045 woman in prison out of an estimated 32 million. This is 0.012%. There are 79,950 men in prison out of an estimated 31 million. This is 0.25% of men.
Therefore men are more likely to offend than transgender people by 1100%.

You lumped transmen and transwomen in together there, and you then compared them with men but not women. Even if the stats you quoted are true transpeople (0.02% of the population) are twice as likely to offend as women (0.012%)

reportedly outweigh Transwoman at a ratio 4:1, with 100 transwoman in prison and 25 transmen in prison, the crime rates stand at 4:1 showing statistically a transwoman is no more likely to offend than a transman. (Who by your definition is a biological woman, no?)

You seem to have a particular problem with transmen. You keep coming back to the idea that because transmen are women then crimes committed by transmen prove - fuck knows how - that transwomen should be permitted into women’s spaces.

You can’t have it both ways. You can’t keep asserting that transmen are violent and this proves that women are violent without admitting transmen are women. And if transmen are women transwomen sure as fuck can’t be women too.

I'm still frozen at the point of 1 in 2400 men are serving prison sentences for sexual offences.

Roughly between 4-6% of reported sexual offences end in conviction... If 100% of the reported sexual offences ended in prison sentences, then that brings the number to..... Anyone? I daren't do the maths myself.

And that's just the reported cases. Many do not report.

Can anyone work this out?

It is.

And I do find it racist when people infer that there is a similar amount of difference between black and white to male and female.

Men are a risk to me as a woman. I also want privacy from them all, including my father and brothers. NO men in women's spaces no matter what they claim to be, thanks.

YY. Exactly, Vicky.

Aspie I was responding to nells comment above mine.

As I said earlier - why not let any man who wants to be in there go in women's spaces, therefore?

Personally, I do believe in innate differences between men and women, in a way that I do not believe in innate differences between black people and white people.

I am quite prepared to believe that any differences in offending rates between black people and white people are down to their standing in society. I cannot find the same justifications between the differing patterns of offending between men and women. It isn't just slightly higher, or slightly lower. It is a completely different profile.

Questioning if people should be excluded based on the statistic likliehood of them being dangerous is not phobic, is it?

So why exclude any man from women’s spaces?

Men are a risk to me as a woman. I also want privacy from them all, including my father and brothers. NO men in women's spaces no matter what they claim to be, thanks.

Questioning if people should be excluded based on the statistic likliehood of them being dangerous is not phobic, is it?

Plus, its extremely racist to make the comparison. Are you saying black people are genetically different to white people?

Black people commit more crimes because they are more disadvantaged. There is no more difference between black people and white people that there is between people with red hair and black hair. Trans men commit more crimes because they are men. There is a huge amount of difference between men and women because they are innately different at a genetic level.

Women and girls should not have to tolerate men in their spaces. That's all there is to it.

Ok then. Let’s just ignore everything we know about how to read data, ignore any variables, ignore that we are missing half (a valuable half) of said data and just come up with our own conclusions and treat them as fact then.

Problem solved, you win, glad you could all engage your brains enough to come up with this valuable conclusion.

Btw data shows 125 transpeople in prison out of an estimated 600,000. This is 0.02% of the population. There are 4,045 woman in prison out of an estimated 32 million. This is 0.012%. There are 79,950 men in prison out of an estimated 31 million. This is 0.25% of men.
Therefore men are more likely to offend than transgender people by 1100%.

Transwoman reportedly outweigh Transwoman at a ratio 4:1, with 100 transwoman in prison and 25 transmen in prison, the crime rates stand at 4:1 showing statistically a transwoman is no more likely to offend than a transman. (Who by your definition is a biological woman, no?)

29% of transgender people in America reported they lived in poverty as opposed to 14% of the general population, 30% have been homeless at some point, they are 4x more likely to be unemployed. All of the above are leading factors for increased chances of being sent to prison.

Do you see how I can manipulate these statistics to show what I want it to show? I’ve not changed any information that’s out there and that’s been mentioned on this thread but my data shows a different story.

I had my day on Kialo as well and it was also an argument about trans crap. They refused to acknowledge biological sex class and when I stated that men in wigs are actually MEN they threw a fit. I stopped going there. I had contact with MANY of the admins and they all refused to acknowledge sex class.

To top it all off, it was my first experience with Kialo, and I never went back.

You can't argue with people who mangle language and refuse to accept material reality.

ScottCheggJnr

Your argument suggests we don't have separate spaces for women at all and all any men in who wish to enter.

James Kirkup wrote about the BBC fact check referred to in thread. The Spectator, August 2018:
'Is the BBC scared of the transgender debate?'
(extract)
"Some recent BBC coverage of transgender issues fails to meet the usual standards of its journalism. Those failings, in turn, raise some wider questions for the BBC on this topic.

The first piece that isn’t up to scratch is this Reality Check about transgender prisoners, published earlier this week. Reality Check, when it’s good, is first-class public service journalism, the sort of rigorous, evidence-based analysis that British journalism and politics desperately need more of. This isn’t good. The piece purports to test an estimate made by Fair Play for Women (FPFW), a feminist group, that 41 per cent of trans women in jail are sex offenders. That’s significantly higher than the 15 per cent of the whole prison population jailed for sexual crimes.

FPFW is concerned that allowing male-born sex offenders to be imprisoned with female-born inmates (who are vulnerable and very often have been victims of sexual abuse) puts women at risk. For the avoidance of doubt, I’m not pretending to be neutral here: I think that concern is a valid one and I’m not convinced current prison policy has sufficient regard for the wellbeing of female prisoners in this context. (There’s more to come on this issue, incidentally, but much of it is subject to court action and can’t yet be reported. But I think there are some awkward questions coming for prison chiefs and politicians alike, in due course.)

The BBC seeks to test the FPFW figure of 41 per cent mainly by way of official Ministry of Justice figures, released following a BBC request under the Freedom of Information Act. Those figures show that 60 of 125 transgender inmates were serving sentences for sexual offences. That’s 48 per cent. That is, to put it mildly, a striking figure. But having obtained that information, through good and proper journalism, the BBC Reality Check team goes to great lengths to tell readers to discount it. The piece is laden with caveats and warnings about those figures, some of which are badly flawed. For instance, the repeated insistence that “we don’t know the gender of the perpetrators in these cases”.

The implication there is that some of the 60 trans sex offenders might be transmen, people born female and now identifying as male. Put simply, this is bordering on offensive, the sort of “Reverse Victim and Offender” tactics that a certain sort of man uses when debating issues of violence against women. Because the sort of fact-checking analytical journalism that Reality Check is supposed to do would show the only reasonable interpretation of those figures for 60 sex offenders is that they relate to people born male who now identify as female.

I say that for several reasons. First, the sexual offences committed by those 60 trans offenders:

27 convictions for rape (plus a further five of attempted rape)
13 convictions for possessing, distributing or making indecent images of children
13 convictions for sexual assault or attempted sexual assault
Nine convictions for causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity
Seven convictions for sexual activity with a child
Seven convictions for indecent assault or gross indecency
These are crimes that are overwhelmingly committed by male-born people, also known as men; a vanishingly small proportion of sexual offence convictions are against women. The latest prison population figures show that of the entire female prison population, only 128 were sentenced for sexual offences. So unless there’s evidence to the contrary (and the BBC certainly hasn’t found any), it’s reasonable to start from the assumption those 60 criminals were born male.

Second, the known facts of transgender inmates in the prison estate. It is an established fact there are some male-born people in the female estate: that’s the whole point of this debate. But are there female-born people in the male estate? These would be people who were born female and later in life identified themselves as male and were sentenced to a custodial sentence, exercising their right under current prison policy to request to serve their sentence in a male prison alongside male-born prisoners. As far as I can establish, there are no such inmates; Frances Crook of the Howard League for Penal Reform, one of the country’s leading authorities on the prison system, also says: “I’ve not heard of trans men going to men’s prisons, they simply would not be safe.”

Yet the Reality Check team seems not to have even tried to check these things. Instead they are inviting readers to infer that it’s possible that a significant number of those sexual offenders might be people were born female and now identify as male. That is poor journalism that verges on being misleading.

There are various other evasions in the Reality Check piece, all seeming to try to lead the reader away from the obvious conclusion that the Fair Play for Women figures were essentially accurate and that a disproportionately high number of transgender prisoners are in jail for sexual offences.

Just for good measure, Reality Check (a supposedly objective fact-check) chucks in a bit of commentary from Jane Fae, a “transgender journalist and campaigner” making the wholly subjective assertion that the public will “misinterpret” those official figures and that “the fall-out in terms of violence and abuse will, in some cases, be significant.” Perhaps that is a valid case to argue, but it is not one that belongs in a Reality Check piece.

In truth, the public is in little danger of misinterpreting those figures, or even of knowing about them, because the BBC did its best to bury them. While most Reality Check pieces are featured on the homepage of BBC News, this one was not apparently placed there at any point. BBC News has made little effort to publicise what might reasonably be considered newsworthy information about a matter of public interest.

The overall impression given is that someone at the BBC set out with the hope of debunking that Fair Play for Women calculation, but uncovered evidence suggesting that calculation was perfectly reasonable, then made significant efforts to avoid saying so or telling anyone that, yes, a lot of male-born offenders who identify themselves as women are in jail for sexual crimes, including crimes committed against women." (continues with discussion of BBC coverage of non-binary cllr Gregor Murray)

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/is-the-bbc-scared-of-the-transgender-debate/

So, again....why can't I say "I don't want to be incarcerated with black people because they as a class commit more violent crime"?

I've still not read a feasible explanation for this awkward question.

And again, the data produced in the MoJ FOI request is exactly what it is - DATA. It isn't definitive proof of prevalence. It's INFORMATION.

All it is proof of is that the known paraphilia of fetishism is present in males in prison that ID as women. Something we are told NEVER HAPPENS as is of no risk to women. Despite it happening. Its proof that the denial of a known criminal paraphilia is an unreasonable denial.