Help - looking for reliable stats on violence against trans people

Gottalife Interesting report from the Trans lobby group. According to it 10% experience threatening behaviour in public spaces, 5% physical abuse and less than 2%sexual abuse. Wonder how that would compare to female stats.

Interestingly 27% said they suffered no abuse of any type ; evidence which was" suspect" according to the report as the people who made this statement felt that because they passed so well as women, the abuse they received was just what any other woman would have been subjected to .

All the high numbers have been found out by Stonewall, for the UK. They include the 41% from the survey the EU did here www.stonewall.org.uk/sites/default/files/trans_stats.pdf
The problem is evaluating the numbers they’ve found.

Men are indeed more likely to be murdered in thiscountry (and afaik most/alcountries) just joined. Statisitically it's safer to be a woman where murder is concerned! But of course something like 98% of murderers are male. Women murder victims are much more likely to be murdered by someone they know/family members/intimate partners than by a stranger which is not the case for men. Not much consolation there for anyone, though.

Transwomen appear to go on murdering and committing other crimes at the same rate as males generally, which is no surprise, while transmen offend in typical female patterns: take from that what you will.

The huge issue - the elephant in the room - is male violence which is so normalised that society seems to view the loss of life in the same way as road collisions. No - scrub that, road safety has been a huge focus and deaths are right down. Why don't we do the same for male violence?

the comment from a PP about women not being human shields for men at risk is very pertinent and powerful and one I would use to my MP or if arguing on behalf of girls' rights to single sex spaces in schools.

OP you could usefully ask your friend if he sees women as 'service humans' born to enable and enrich male lives (the handmaiden view) or whether he recognises women as full human beings and people in their own right. If he goes for option B you have a common starting point and can ask some hard questions about the 'human shield/just be nice/ budge up and hand over your rights' expectation. And if he continues to argue as if he believed option A you can call him on that!

Entitled ‘Lies, damn lies and statistics (subtitled ‘bullshit in research and the gobshites who create them’)’

I feel a PhH coming on...

Can anyone link me to any studies?

Bleedin' 'ell Crunchermuncher. All that flak for asking a simple question. You can't win.

Any research send them my way. My favourite bit when I studied psychology was stats - I (shines fingernails) even read the MMR ‘research’ back in ‘86(?) and declared it to be a crock.

Stonewall directs you to a survey done by the European Union Agency For Fundamental Rights. This was an online survey in 2012, of LGBT people. The notes to the survey says “limitations..not random and the results can not be generalised to characterise the whole LGBT population”. The Technical notes confirm it was an Opt-in survey. 6,759 people from the UK chose to do the survey. 12% said they were transgender. Ages skewed young (There is a table) because of the survey method. Young people probably experience a lot more violence so this makes the data harder to compare to UK averages from other sources.

If I select UK and transgender. The question “physically/sexuality attacked or threatened with violence at home or elsewhere in the last 5 years for any reason” has yes for 41%.
The problem is what to compare this to.
Is 41% bad? Yes.

Meaningfully worse than other groups, bearing in mind the limitations of the survey? Dunno.

The same survey has 31% for “all AMAB” (will be trans and non trans). All AFAB is 30% (same definition). Lesbians are at 26%.

So trans people might be reporting a worse experience with violence than others in the UK, but it’s not exactly proof.

What’s his proof? It’s often flawed’research’, articles in our favourite ‘news’paper or just made up stats.

I want to change his mind. He's not asking me to change mine or justify myself.

Isn't he? When he says that trans people are more at risk than women is he not trying to convince you that this is true?

You've asked question about why people like your friend think certain things:
trans people are more at risk than women. Where does this come from?
Has this belief come from women not being a minority group (we are an oppressed majority) and therefore are somehow less deserving of support?

These are things which your friend is saying, or that you think he believes. The only people who can explain to you where these beliefs come from are people like your friend who believe them. Once you know where their beliefs come from then you can start to dismantle them. If you don't know why they believe these things, then you might find all sorts of evidence to refute what you think they believe to be evidence, just to be met with, 'I didn't mean it like that'.

Perhaps your friend believes in gendered souls. All the evidence in the world won't convince him if he thinks it is possible for someone to literally be 'a woman in a man's body'.

Look - if violence is counted as someone saying ‘sir/miss’ in the wrong context - no matter what the person actually looks like - then that gives a good indication of the ‘amount’.

Plus the stats they love the quote are often those of trans women in South America (just look at the stats for murder of women there too whilst you are at it) and there is a correlation with rates and sex workers.

Why would trans people have more violence directed at them? How would the violent people know they were trans?

I suspect there are no actually useful statistics unfortunately. There is no definition of trans, so without that the number of trans people can’t be calculated, so the rate of anything including violence can’t be calculated.
There seem to be no statistics that calculate “violence” consistently for different groups. There are surveys that count it for one group, and in some literal violence can even include a mum not wanting to order dc to call her Soon To Be Ex “mum” too. There is no consistent methodologies. That’s always the clue in reading a news article; is one metric from one source (eg an internet survey) being compared to another (e.g police records).

The death certificates in the UK are generally prepared quite professionally, although possibly suicide is understated out of sympathy for the deceased’s loved ones. As mentioned already, murder rates for trans people although sadly too high, are probably lower than UK averages unless the count of trans people in the UK is much lower than most groups claim,

Also, I want to write to my MP and want to marshal a robust argument before I put pen to paper (or fingers to keyboard).

Sorry, hadn't read your other posts before posting.

Men beating up men who present in a feminine way is a form of gay bashing. Most people believe that most transwomen are attracted to men. We don't allow gay men to use women's spaces to escape violent homophobic men, so why should we let the men who think they are women do so?

Most (nearly all) 'transwomen' have penises, so they are most definitely men, because women don't have penises.

(This probably isn't the best line to use with your MP, but it's worth keeping in mind all the time that people can't change sex. A man who believes himself to be a woman is still a man. No amount of wishful thinking or surgery will change that.)

The problem of male violence against other men should not be addressed by removing those at risk from male only spaces. Why should gender non-confirming men lose access to male spaces? It’s punishing the victim and the perpetrators are validated.

Women are not human shields.

If he believes the answer is everyone who thinks they are at increased risk in male single sex spaces should use the women’s facilities with zero gate keeping, what does he think that does to the risk? It’s not a magic space free of risk because the sign on the door says women. It’s a space of reduced risk because it does not include men. Look at the stats for sexual offences in mixed and single sex changing areas.

No one wants trans people to be at risk. All the data out there clearly shows that making spaces mixed sex increases risk so why is it touted as the solution?

Here's one site

tgeu.org/transgender-day-of-visibility-2016-trans-murder-monitoring-update/

Interestingly, it reports 229 murders of transgender people in Mexico between 1st of January 2008 and the 31st of December 2015, when something like a 225,000 Mexicans in general were murdered. Making being transgender absolutely the safest demographic by far.

I've been discussing the need for women only spaces with a friend. He is supportive however seems to have bought the narrative that trans people are more at risk than women.

Where does this come from?

Ask him. He is making a claim. Where does he say this comes from? Why does he believe this? If he wants you to believe this, he needs to find some evidence. If he has none, why should you believe it or run around trying to find evidence to the contrary?

Interestingly, I did put the argument forward that the problem is men's violence and not women's problem to solve, which was a perspective he hadn't considered before, and thought that it made a lot of sense.
I think this is the crux of it. Yes there is data - as I recall, the last figures I saw for the UK reported less than one transwoman murdered a year over the last decade. But it's not a competition and no violence is acceptable.

The point is that women should not be expected to protect other groups from male violence. Until men sort it out, all we can do is keep ourselves safe as best we can.

Here is a study.
It's pretty old but things havn't changed much.

www.pfc.org.uk/pdf/EngenderedPenalties.pdf

The problem you face OP is that much of the belief of "most oppressed group ever" comes from reports about high levels of "hate crime" directed at trans people. Here's an example:

www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-48756370 (the Analysis section is by the BBC LGBT Correspondent Ben Hunte who often operates as a propagandist)

However, when "hate crime" statistics are self-reported, these kinds of reports get added to the statistics:

www.faircop.org.uk/fruit-of-the-poison-tree/

In terms of having something clearly defined that can be compared across groups, it seems that murder rate is the most useful metric.