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

Several countries have had gender self ID laws in place for years now - but they are not experiencing the collapse in society you imagine!

Here's an article on how Denmark has navigated this, and addresses some of the points you bring up:

www.context.news/socioeconomic-inclusion/denmarks-decade-of-self-id-cools-debate-on-trans-rights

thanks for the new thread.

I was just taking a quick Look at Twitter and this came up

Having recently been to NYC I can attest that there are a lot of gender neutral toilets in the parks now. In the city such as Central Park, and further afield.

There are also single sex loos in much newer buildings (thankfully) and the Met. With huge gaps beneath them.

where it was fucked up is where a set of single sex loos with huge gaps have been turned into mixed sex.

Can I ask SuggestionsPlease and Tandora- is everyone who says they are trans Trans?

Tandora has been talking about a groundbreaking new understanding of biology that means sex isn’t about reproductive function, or the physical structure of the body.

Do we treat everyone who says they are trans as being trans?
Because it’s really important, given that we have no external way of knowing who is trans. If everyone who says they are trans is trans, then we no longer have the sex category. It doesn’t exist.

The only people whose sex we will know are the male people who inherit titles whether transwomen or not, and the female people who don’t inherit titles whether they are transmen or not.
Other than that, it’s a free for all. No more women’s sport, no more women’s prisons, no more men’s sheds, no more men’s darts.

Is that the plan? Because I see flaws.

In my mind the risk that "trans women" pose is not even the issue. It's men. All men.

Take "Rose" and the Darlington Nurses. To me it is quite clear that Rose is, at the very least, a pervert and a flasher. The Darlington Nurses have been assaulted and not only are they not believed, they are vilified! And their attacker is applauded!

It's disgusting.

I've no doubt this happens regularly and, were it not for the lifeline of the SC ruling, would continue to happen. I'm sure that trans women who -believe that they- pass will continue to use wrong sex facilities and that's fine as long as they keep their maleness to themselves. It is comforting to me to know that if they step out of line, women have the law on their side to say "actually, no, you don't belong here. Get out".

Evidence shows women have been assaulted by trans women in single sex spaces.

The risk factor is maleness not transness.

At any rate I don't want to share single sex spaces with male people whether they are trans women or not.

Why do you ignore my wishes and reasonable boundaries?

And as for 'reasonable' are you immune to what some trans women do in women's bathrooms, there is video evidence of it all over parts of the internet?

Why is it unreasonable to say no to those kind of behaviours?

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

1. Base Rate Fallacy

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.

1. Faulty Inversion of Statistics

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.

1. Misuse of Probabilities and Linear Scaling

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.

1. Neglect of Selection Bias

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.

1. No Causal Link or Comparative 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.

Why do you think women are at risk from some male people but not others? Or do you think males as a class don’t pose a threat to women?

I guess we disagree on what reasonable boundaries are. The evidence shows that women are not at increased risk from trans people using bathrooms of their gender ID
https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s13178-018-0335-z

I just want to know why suggestionsplease1 doesn't think that women should have boundaries.

Why are you putting the wishes of male people above reasonable boundaries for female people?

I disagree with your maths that has led you to believe that there are thousands of trans women who have committed sexual offences in the UK.

To continue on Backtolurk's point about Nordic countries showing high rates of sexual assault, I think this article highlights some relevant points about recording and reporting differences across countries:

www.bbc.com/news/magazine-19592372