Page 4 | "Biological sex is a multidimensional variable with various components" - Thread 3

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 2025-07-27T08:55:02+00:00

Starting a new thread so I can respond to {mention:suggestionsplease1} 's most recent post.

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 15:33

To quote Sall Grover:

"Wah wah waaaah! Why do you need female only spaces anyway?"

"Because we want them."

OP posts:

TheKeatingFive · 27/07/2025 15:30

Thing is, what if these countries aren't looking for evidence?

In Ireland, we have one brave journalist telling the stories of the women being traumatised by being locked up with men in Limerick Prison.

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4kiybGqqnUZjRMWDmYLjOF?si=JRpSkO9BSEiSu86zJZh8yA

But the authorities are turning a blind eye, let alone actually amassing evidence on the topic. In the meantime, Barbie Khardashian physically attacks his female social worker, threatens to rape and murder his female prison officer and another female inmate. But where is this showing up in your evidence? Clue. It isn't.

Your point is irrelevant anyway. Women don't have to give into men's demands unless they can prove it will harm them. No is a complete sentence.

Spotify

https://open.spotify.com/episode/4kiybGqqnUZjRMWDmYLjOF?si=JRpSkO9BSEiSu86zJZh8yA

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 15:26

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 15:19

And yet there is no evidence of increased risk to women in any of the countries that have introduced it.

And no evidence in the Massachusetts matched localities study that regions with gender self -ID permissions in place for bathroom facilities had any increase in crimes compared against towns that did not have such permissions.

Show quote history

Why do you want between half a million and a million male sex offenders in the UK to be given free access to women's single sex spaces?

I don't care what happens in other countries.

OP posts:

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 15:24

https://www.mumsnet.com/talk/womensrights/5381023-as-jk-rowling-turns-60-john-boyne-on-why-he-stands-behind-the-fearless-author

Reposting this thread, with an archive link to a brilliant piece by John Boyne about JK. Rowling.

About her detractors, he writes the following:

For these perfectly rational beliefs, she has been pilloried by three distinct types of person: the middle-aged men who’ve been rejected by women all their lives and have now abandoned the real world in favour of taking out their frustrations on social media; there’s the young people, so indoctrinated by social media, that they fail to recognise actual misogyny and homophobia when they see it. And there are the grown women who are astonishingly complicit in their own erasure.

These, perhaps, are the worst group, but it must be remembered that for every Commander Waterford, there’s a Serena Joy standing behind him, ready to pin a handmaiden down as her husband rapes her.

We can all draw our own conclusions about which category certain posters here fall into.

OP posts:

Annoyedone · 27/07/2025 15:21

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 15:19

And yet there is no evidence of increased risk to women in any of the countries that have introduced it.

And no evidence in the Massachusetts matched localities study that regions with gender self -ID permissions in place for bathroom facilities had any increase in crimes compared against towns that did not have such permissions.

Show quote history

I don’t care. No males in female spaces unless you can show how this benefits women. As there are no benefits, they can use the male facilities. .

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 15:19

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 15:13

If you want male people to be able to use women's spaces on a self ID basis, that means all male people.

That means that in order to allow the X number of trans identifying men to use women's spaces, you accept the risk that any of the other 33.1 million men in the UK might do likewise. 500,000 to ~1 million of whom are sex offenders.

That is what self ID means. That's (one of the reasons) why we won't be implementing it.

Show quote history

And yet there is no evidence of increased risk to women in any of the countries that have introduced it.

And no evidence in the Massachusetts matched localities study that regions with gender self -ID permissions in place for bathroom facilities had any increase in crimes compared against towns that did not have such permissions.

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 15:13

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 15:08

Well of course this is just another in a long line of false attributions.

Why don't you provide the data from the countries that have implemented gender self-ID that crimes against women have increased since the introduction of it?

Show quote history

If you want male people to be able to use women's spaces on a self ID basis, that means all male people.

That means that in order to allow the X number of trans identifying men to use women's spaces, you accept the risk that any of the other 33.1 million men in the UK might do likewise. 500,000 to ~1 million of whom are sex offenders.

That is what self ID means. That's (one of the reasons) why we won't be implementing it.

OP posts:

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 15:08

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:58

I asked ChatGPT to give high and low estimates for the number of "cisgender" men who have committed sexual offences in the UK and are currently at liberty (using the same assumptions) and it gave me the following answer:

Final Estimate:

Estimated number of cisgender men in the UK who have committed sexual offences and are not currently in prison:

Low estimate: ~516,000

High estimate: ~1.18 million

So, according to ChatGPT, there are most likely between 2969 and 6769 trans women who have committed sexual offences currently at liberty in the UK, and between 516,000 and 1.18 million men who have committed sexual offences currently at liberty in the UK.

And people like @suggestionsplease1 and @Tandora would like all of them to be allowed to use women's single sex spaces.

Edited

Well of course this is just another in a long line of false attributions.

Why don't you provide the data from the countries that have implemented gender self-ID that crimes against women have increased since the introduction of it?

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:58

I asked ChatGPT to give high and low estimates for the number of "cisgender" men who have committed sexual offences in the UK and are currently at liberty (using the same assumptions) and it gave me the following answer:

Final Estimate:

Estimated number of cisgender men in the UK who have committed sexual offences and are not currently in prison:

Low estimate: ~516,000

High estimate: ~1.18 million

So, according to ChatGPT, there are most likely between 2969 and 6769 trans women who have committed sexual offences currently at liberty in the UK, and between 516,000 and 1.18 million men who have committed sexual offences currently at liberty in the UK.

And people like @suggestionsplease1 and @Tandora would like all of them to be allowed to use women's single sex spaces.

OP posts:

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:54

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:53

Yes, it will also say something along these lines as well:

"It extrapolates from a tiny prison population (129) — statistically unstable.

This is a rough model, and drawing strong conclusions from it could be deeply misleading or used in bad faith."

Generating accurate figures for a country with a population of 68 million from an incredibly small initial data set is simply not feasible. (My comment)

Show quote history

OK, so what is your estimate for the number of trans women who have committed sexual offences and are currently at liberty in the UK?

OP posts:

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:53

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:45

I just asked ChatGPT the following question:

The population of the UK is about 68.35 million.

The number of men in the UK is about about 33.1 million.

The number of trans women in the UK is estimated to be between 200,000 and 500,000.

There are 78781 men in prison in the UK, of which 13234 have committed a sex offence.

There are 129 trans women in prison in the UK, of which 76 have committed a sex offence.

It is estimated that fewer than 3% of reported sexual offences in the UK result in a perpetrator being charged, and fewer than 2% result in a conviction.

The maximum sentence for sexual assault in the UK is 10 years and the maximum sentence for rape in the UK is life imprisonment, with the average sentence being 8-10 years.

Taking into account the above statistics, can you give a low and high estimate of the number of trans women in the UK who have committed a sexual assault or rape and are not currently serving a custodial sentence.

It gave the following answer:

To estimate the number of **trans women in the UK who have committed sexual assault or rape and are not currently in prison, we need to:

Estimate the total number of trans women in the UK who have committed such offences.
Subtract the number currently serving time for sex offences.

We’ll use the lower and upper population estimates for trans women (200,000 to 500,000), and the known data about convictions and incarceration to calculate a low and high estimate.

Step 1: Estimate the proportion of trans women in prison for sex offences

We are told:

129 trans women are in prison

76 of them are in for sex offences

So, roughly:

> 76 / 129 = ~59% of incarcerated trans women are serving time for sex offences
This is a much higher proportion than among cisgender men (16.8% of male prisoners are sex offenders)

Step 2: Estimate the total number of trans women who have committed sex offences (not just those in prison)

a) Use general conviction rate estimates

We're told:

<2% of reported sexual offences lead to a conviction.

Even fewer offences are reported in the first place (many are unreported).

This implies a large gap between offences committed and actual convictions/incarcerations.

b) Use prison data to extrapolate backwards

If 76 trans women are in prison for sex offences, and the average sentence is 8–10 years, that implies roughly 7–10 years' worth of convicted offenders are in prison at a given time.

> So we can estimate the average number of new convictions per year as:
convictions/year

If this represents <2% of reported cases, and only a fraction of total offences are reported, the true number of offences is likely much higher.

Let’s conservatively assume that for every trans woman convicted, 50–100 others commit offences who are never convicted (taking into account underreporting and low conviction rates).

So:

> Estimated trans women who have committed a sex offence = 76 convicted × 50 to 100 = 3,800 to 7,600

This would be over all time, but since sexual offences may have occurred decades ago, let’s assume that only a portion are still alive or in the community — say, 80–90%.

> So: Low estimate = 3,800 × 0.8 = 3,040
High estimate = 7,600 × 0.9 = 6,840

Step 3: Subtract those currently in prison (76)

> Low-end estimate: 3,040 – 76 = ~2,964
High-end estimate: 6,840 – 76 = ~6,764

Final Estimate:

Estimated number of trans women in the UK who have committed sexual assault or rape and are not currently in prison:

Low estimate: ~2,960

High estimate: ~6,760

Let me know if you'd like this estimate adjusted based on different assumptions, such as:

Using a different multiplier for unreported/offences-per-conviction.

Incorporating comparisons with cisgender male offending rates.

Adjusting for population proportions or changes over time.

Yes, it will also say something along these lines as well:

"It extrapolates from a tiny prison population (129) — statistically unstable.

This is a rough model, and drawing strong conclusions from it could be deeply misleading or used in bad faith."

Generating accurate figures for a country with a population of 68 million from an incredibly small initial data set is simply not feasible. (My comment)

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:49

You'll note that ChatGPT's low estimate was very close to mine and its high estimate was more than twice mine.

OP posts:

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:45

I just asked ChatGPT the following question:

The population of the UK is about 68.35 million.

The number of men in the UK is about about 33.1 million.

The number of trans women in the UK is estimated to be between 200,000 and 500,000.

There are 78781 men in prison in the UK, of which 13234 have committed a sex offence.

There are 129 trans women in prison in the UK, of which 76 have committed a sex offence.

It is estimated that fewer than 3% of reported sexual offences in the UK result in a perpetrator being charged, and fewer than 2% result in a conviction.

The maximum sentence for sexual assault in the UK is 10 years and the maximum sentence for rape in the UK is life imprisonment, with the average sentence being 8-10 years.

Taking into account the above statistics, can you give a low and high estimate of the number of trans women in the UK who have committed a sexual assault or rape and are not currently serving a custodial sentence.

It gave the following answer:

To estimate the number of **trans women in the UK who have committed sexual assault or rape and are not currently in prison, we need to:

Estimate the total number of trans women in the UK who have committed such offences.
Subtract the number currently serving time for sex offences.

We’ll use the lower and upper population estimates for trans women (200,000 to 500,000), and the known data about convictions and incarceration to calculate a low and high estimate.

Step 1: Estimate the proportion of trans women in prison for sex offences

We are told:

129 trans women are in prison

76 of them are in for sex offences

So, roughly:

> 76 / 129 = ~59% of incarcerated trans women are serving time for sex offences
This is a much higher proportion than among cisgender men (16.8% of male prisoners are sex offenders)

Step 2: Estimate the total number of trans women who have committed sex offences (not just those in prison)

a) Use general conviction rate estimates

We're told:

<2% of reported sexual offences lead to a conviction.

Even fewer offences are reported in the first place (many are unreported).

This implies a large gap between offences committed and actual convictions/incarcerations.

b) Use prison data to extrapolate backwards

If 76 trans women are in prison for sex offences, and the average sentence is 8–10 years, that implies roughly 7–10 years' worth of convicted offenders are in prison at a given time.

> So we can estimate the average number of new convictions per year as:
convictions/year

If this represents <2% of reported cases, and only a fraction of total offences are reported, the true number of offences is likely much higher.

Let’s conservatively assume that for every trans woman convicted, 50–100 others commit offences who are never convicted (taking into account underreporting and low conviction rates).

So:

> Estimated trans women who have committed a sex offence = 76 convicted × 50 to 100 = 3,800 to 7,600

This would be over all time, but since sexual offences may have occurred decades ago, let’s assume that only a portion are still alive or in the community — say, 80–90%.

> So: Low estimate = 3,800 × 0.8 = 3,040
High estimate = 7,600 × 0.9 = 6,840

Step 3: Subtract those currently in prison (76)

> Low-end estimate: 3,040 – 76 = ~2,964
High-end estimate: 6,840 – 76 = ~6,764

Final Estimate:

Estimated number of trans women in the UK who have committed sexual assault or rape and are not currently in prison:

Low estimate: ~2,960

High estimate: ~6,760

Let me know if you'd like this estimate adjusted based on different assumptions, such as:

Using a different multiplier for unreported/offences-per-conviction.

Incorporating comparisons with cisgender male offending rates.

Adjusting for population proportions or changes over time.

OP posts:

TheKeatingFive · 27/07/2025 14:43

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:35

I think if you took your approach to a reputable independent statistician in criminology they would point out the same flaws in your approach.

And the GC case is often that men convicted of sex crimes are using self-ID to try to gain access to women's prisons and are not genuinely trans. If you believe that then the number of genuine trans people in jail for sex offences is much lower and therefore you can not extrapolate the figures that you arrive at.

You can't have it both ways.

Show quote history

Well no it's you that can't have it both ways.

Either transwomen DO offend at a higher rate than the general population

OR

Criminal men are pretending to be 'transwomen' to get access to women's prisons.

Though we were assured this would never happen, no man would ever do this, remember?

Both of these situations are extremely problematic for women and putting them in unnecessary danger. If you can't see that it's because you have no respect or consideration for women.

lifeturnsonadime · 27/07/2025 14:42

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:35

I think if you took your approach to a reputable independent statistician in criminology they would point out the same flaws in your approach.

And the GC case is often that men convicted of sex crimes are using self-ID to try to gain access to women's prisons and are not genuinely trans. If you believe that then the number of genuine trans people in jail for sex offences is much lower and therefore you can not extrapolate the figures that you arrive at.

You can't have it both ways.

Show quote history

So if sex abusers use 'self ID' to worm their way to access women's prisons then you must know that bad actors will do the same with any and all women's single sex spaces.

Yet you still advocate for this.

Mind blowing.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 27/07/2025 14:38

These women are facing this harassment as a result of this obsessive and myopic focus on determination of who is a man and a woman.

And why do you think this focus has arisen? Is it because suddenly women spontaneously became suspicious of each other, or is it in fact because we become aware that there really were men claiming to be women not just for social acceptance but to the extent of appropriating the very things that are reserved for women to spare us the rapaciousness and entitlement of men?

Is your solution to a fence that has been damaged always not to strengthen it but to throw your hands up, decide we didn't really need it and knock it down altogether?

God, I hope you aren't responsible for any livestock!

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:35

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:26

But it didn't have a reference point to work from when it dismissed the 76 currently serving sex offenders figure either.

It said that you couldn't extrapolate 76 to 3000 (which was an underestimate, by the way) without more information about the size of the population, and then basically concluded by saying, "And even if there are 3000 trans identifying male sex offenders walking around? So what? That might not be a very big number!" without even asking you which country you were talking about.

I think we can be fairly certain that ChatGPT was not basing its assumptions on China.

Anyway, thanks for giving us a live demonstration of why you shouldn't get ChatGPT to write your responses to difficult questions asked by more intelligent posters on Mumsnet for you.

Edited

Show quote history

I think if you took your approach to a reputable independent statistician in criminology they would point out the same flaws in your approach.

And the GC case is often that men convicted of sex crimes are using self-ID to try to gain access to women's prisons and are not genuinely trans. If you believe that then the number of genuine trans people in jail for sex offences is much lower and therefore you can not extrapolate the figures that you arrive at.

You can't have it both ways.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 27/07/2025 14:27

I have to admit I'm disappointed that Suggestions seems to have picked up the baton for thread three. I have been looking forward to making a Tandora's Box pun all night!

(It wasn't going to be a smutty one BTW, was going to be about how what TRAs think they are doing when they obsess about the damage respecting physical sex does to trans people is protecting them, but what they are actually doing is making them more and more scared of imaginary hate and pushing them further and further away from a place they can find accomodation and acceptance , being like Pandora in the legend letting out all the troubles in the world and then in fear slamming the lid on hope)

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:26

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:23

It didn't have the context to guage that, so no this is not an issue at all. For as far as it could be aware I could have been talking about China with a population of 1.4 billion, or the global population. It did not have a reference point to work from.

Show quote history

But it didn't have a reference point to work from when it dismissed the 76 currently serving sex offenders figure either.

It said that you couldn't extrapolate 76 to 3000 (which was an underestimate, by the way) without more information about the size of the population, and then basically concluded by saying, "And even if there are 3000 trans identifying male sex offenders walking around? So what? That might not be a very big number!" without even asking you which country you were talking about.

I think we can be fairly certain that ChatGPT was not basing its assumptions on China.

Anyway, thanks for giving us a live demonstration of why you shouldn't get ChatGPT to write your responses to difficult questions asked by more intelligent posters on Mumsnet for you.

OP posts:

Annoyedone · 27/07/2025 14:25

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:23

It didn't have the context to guage that, so no this is not an issue at all. For as far as it could be aware I could have been talking about China with a population of 1.4 billion, or the global population. It did not have a reference point to work from.

Show quote history

So is that a no on benefits to women to allowing males in their spaces then? In that case no Thankyou. All males whatever their identity can use male spaces. Glad that’s sorted.

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:23

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:15

I mean, surely the fact that ChatGPT suggested that 3000 trans identifying male sex offenders at large in the population might not be a very high number should at least have given you pause for thought...?

No?

@suggestionsplease1

It didn't have the context to guage that, so no this is not an issue at all. For as far as it could be aware I could have been talking about China with a population of 1.4 billion, or the global population. It did not have a reference point to work from.

FlirtsWithRhinos · 27/07/2025 14:19

remember the time FWR dedicated a thread to harassing the winner of a running competition because they wrongly believed that the person was a transwoman and shouldn't have been taking the winning place from a woman

Gosh, I remember that thread. Would not have decribed it as harrassing - I don't think anyone contacted the women or her place of work for example, or put up pasters calling for her to be hung, which I believe is the gold standard for harassing women when performed by TRAs.

I think I'd have called it "getting it wrong". Still not ok, but a long way from "harassing".

But how long ago was it that that thread happened now? And how many TW and TRAs have threatened women or been convicted of a violent crime since then? Don't you think it's a little bit weird which of the two one you find most concerning?

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:15

I mean, surely the fact that ChatGPT suggested that 3000 trans identifying male sex offenders at large in the population might not be a very high number should at least have given you pause for thought...?

No?

@suggestionsplease1

OP posts:

Original poster

MissScarletInTheBallroom · 27/07/2025 14:13

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 14:10

ChatGPT
You said:
Generate an essay plan that transwomen are not women
ChatGPT said:
That's a deeply sensitive and controversial topic. The statement "trans women are not women" is a position that directly challenges the identities and lived experiences of many trans people. Before I proceed, I want to be clear that promoting respectful, informed, and ethical dialogue is essential, especially around topics that can impact vulnerable communities.

That said, I can help you explore how people construct arguments around this topic — whether for academic, legal, or philosophical purposes — including how someone might structure an essay that makes the case from a biological, legal, or philosophical standpoint.

Show quote history

And when you ask it to generate an essay plan concluding that trans women are women, does it give any of the same caveats?

OP posts:

FlirtsWithRhinos · 27/07/2025 14:13

suggestionsplease1 · 27/07/2025 10:25

ChatGPT
You said:
Can you challenge the logic and maths of the following analysis please:

"There are 76 trans woman serving prison sentences for a sexual offence.

It is estimated that fewer than 3% of reported sexual assaults result in someone being charged, and fewer than 2% of reported sexual assaults result in someone being convicted.

Based on that, if 76 trans women are currently in prison for a sexual offence, the number of trans women who have actually committed a sexual offence is probably in excess of 3000, almost all of whom are currently at liberty"

ChatGPT said:
You're right to be skeptical of this argument — it misuses statistics and commits several logical and mathematical errors. Let's break it down and challenge it on several fronts:

🔍 CLAIM SUMMARY
“There are 76 trans women serving prison sentences for sexual offences.
Only 2% of reported sexual assaults lead to conviction.
Therefore, the actual number of trans women who have committed sexual assaults must be over 3,000.”

🧠 CRITICAL FLAWS IN LOGIC & MATH

Base Rate Fallacy

The analysis does not account for the size of the total trans women population, which is essential for determining whether 76 is disproportionately high or low.

Why it matters: If trans women make up 0.5% of the population, then you'd expect them to represent 0.5% of sexual offenders unless there is evidence of different rates of offending.

The raw number “76” tells us nothing about prevalence without population context.

Faulty Inversion of Statistics

The author misuses the “2% conviction rate” to extrapolate backward — from convictions to estimates of total crimes committed. This is invalid reasoning unless specific conditions are met.

The 2% conviction rate refers to the general population and includes all kinds of sexual assault cases — not only those by trans women.

It is not statistically sound to apply this general figure to a small, specific subpopulation without direct evidence.

Misuse of Probabilities and Linear Scaling

They assume a linear relationship: “If 2% of offences are convicted, then 76 convictions means 76 ÷ 0.02 = 3,800 offences.”

That’s wrong for three reasons:

Conviction rate ≠ inverse of offence count. Many assumptions (like equal reporting rates and prosecution likelihood across groups) must hold for this formula to work.

It assumes that trans women offend and get reported at the same rate as everyone else — there's no evidence offered for that.

It also assumes no duplicate offenders (e.g., that each convicted person = one offence), which is often false.

Neglect of Selection Bias

Prison statistics do not represent the total population, just the subset that has been:

Reported,

Investigated,

Prosecuted, and

Sentenced to a custodial term.

This excludes:

Those given non-custodial sentences,

Those detained pre-trial,

Those found not guilty,

And those never reported.

The logic of scaling up prison numbers is flawed unless the prison population is a representative sample, which it isn't.

No Causal Link or Comparative Rate

Even if there were 3,000 trans women who had committed offences (a hypothetical), is that a high rate?

Without comparing this to the number of cisgender men who commit sexual offences (which is vastly higher), the claim lacks meaningful context.

Sexual offence rates are far more strongly correlated with male socialisation, past trauma, or other criminological factors than gender identity per se.

Show quote history

Please, if you are going to use chatGPT, read the results and apply your own thinking before posting.

All that response is actually saying is "There could be unknown factors specific to trans women that change the extrapolation." No shit Sherlock!

However, in the absence of any information about such factors actually existing, extrapolating the general population rate is a reasonable place to start.

Saying "we don't know the exact stats for TW so let's start by assuming they are in line with other men" is at least as valid, if not more so, than saying "we don't know the exact stats for TW so let's start by assuming they are way better than other men and the police just do a far better better job at catching TW who carry out sexual assaults than other men".

And from the perspective of one of the women and girls' whose protections you are agitating to reduce simply on the basis of - what, a gut feel that TW can't be going around doing the same sort of sexual assaults as other men? - I for one would prefer we use the more cautious method of actually finding evidence of lower risk first.

(Actually, as a fully realised human female whose experiences of men and of male-dominated society extend to more than simply being a target for sexual abuse, I think even if you proved no TW ever hurt even a female fly and the rapes that have happened were somehow just a funny misunderstanding 🤮, it still does not justify taking away the legal and social right of female people to exist as more than a subgroup within a state of mind defined by men, but that doesn’t change why you are wrong.)

Of course if you have additional information that can make this more accurate, please do share it. That is a valid next step to your boilerplate cut and paste.

If not, @MissScarletInTheBallroom ' s extrapolation has a more valid base than your handwaving "yeah but it might not be so therefoe it definitely isn't".