Does the guardian really not see?

As mentioned upthread, there's no evidence that trans women share male pattern violence because:

A. Incarceration/reporting is not the same as offending & we don't know offending rates.
B. trans people are statistically too insignificant to make any meaningful conclusions
C. group dynamics matter (straight/gay/poor/wealthy/ young old)

In terms of typical gendered behaviours, the indisputable evidence is in consumer, employment, life & special interest choices.

Go and read TransUK Reddit for a few days.

My mistake, you are right but not quite in the way you think given sex isn't binary but bi modal.

"This confusion was a conscious contruction of post modernist theories which postulated that you could revolutionise society through the manipulation of language. That we could be anything we wanted to be through altering the social meaning of words."

This comment shows a profound misunderstanding of what post modernism is which is basically a critique of how narrative is exploited by the powerful …so the opposite of what you are claiming. And in any case, the fact 'trans' is a word that distinguishes females at birth from males doesn't in any way conflate the two.

"An adult male, a man is free ( in our society, anyway) to express all of his potential - within the bounds of social rules of behaviour - as is a woman. We can do this without having to so self consciously role play opposite sex 'performances' - but we are also free to do that should we like ( within certain social constraints)"

The fact that you consider organic personality inclinations/preferences as a 'performance' is more a reflection of your own rigid expectations of conformity rather than any credible analysis of human behaviour. That you seriously believe there's no biological naturally occurring autonomy that drives preferences is quite the tell.

But I suggest that denying the reality of biological sex and the consequences of it is a fool's game. To a large extent we are our bodies; we are our circumstances. We are not all 'free spiritual beings' or 'souls' floating around in a world of dense and restrictive matter looking for a place to call home. We are all born into a certain set of conditions which shape our experience. We didn't 'choose' any of them.

Sex Matters, and it matters to women, especially......which is why we have developed certain protections and safeguards. You cannot change your sex...though as you intimate....our sex does determine and shape our life experiences and choices...no matter how much we long to be transcendent beings with no restriction.

Noone is denying the reality of biological sex. If trans people did they wouldn’t need to go to the extent to change their bodies medically. What you are attempting to do here is conflate this strawman with conflicting rights. Again as mentioned upthread, groups experiencing conflicting rights isn't a licence to deny their existence nor is there an inability to manage them.

There's this word called 'trans' that we use to distinguish the two. Hope that helps.

Ive already listed the different choices several times as in consumerist, employment, special interest & life choices.

You can google for a plethora of evidence proving women & men on average make different choices in these areas. That you are being obtuse about the bleedin' obvious doesn't do your credibility any favours.

No they don't. That's been long debunked. The fact is the numbers used to pretend this misinformation to be true were based on incarceration rates not offending rates. Big difference. For example we have no idea how many violent crimes are committed because most aren't reported. See: rape. Not to mention the trans community is so minuscule its impossible to draw any meaningful statistical conclusions.

There's this word called 'trans' that we use to distinguish the two. Hope that helps.

Like Rachel Dolezal? Her "passing" was a deception. Dolezal, a white woman, actively misrepresented her background, lied about her parentage, and used physical alterations (hair, makeup) to create a false persona to "pass" as Black.
Transgender Identity is authentic inclination & expression of behavioural characteristics similar to women.* *Transgender people transition to align their outer life with their internal, lived reality. Transitioning is widely seen as a necessary move toward authenticity, not a fraudulent act designed to deceive

On average behaviours that differentiate them from men. For example, like the violence that GC women like to claim should disqualify men from using their spaces.

Reporting isn't offending. See rape. And murder reporting doesn't include missing persons. In any case, particularly in the case of murder, the perpetrator may be suffering from some form of psychopathy, severe personality disorder/mental illness where they may under the delusion they are trans, the antichrist or under the instructions of god & not be.

Again, there's also the matter of statistical insignificance & broad group attribution.

But tell me what you think about this. Why would it be that straight men are more violent than gay men, lesbians are more violent than straight women & lesbians are more violent than straight women? Is it masculine characteristics of aggression/(disagreeability personality trait) that the more violent groups share? And what does this mean for transwomen who probably share more agreeable personality traits than disagreeable?

I suspect what drives offending is a lot more complicated than people think.

"This confusion was a conscious contruction of post modernist theories which postulated that you could revolutionise society through the manipulation of language. That we could be anything we wanted to be through altering the social meaning of words."

This comment shows a profound misunderstanding of what post modernism is which is basically a critique of how narrative is exploited by the powerful …so the opposite of what you are claiming. And in any case, the fact 'trans' is a word that distinguishes females at birth from males doesn't in any way conflate the two.

"An adult male, a man is free ( in our society, anyway) to express all of his potential - within the bounds of social rules of behaviour - as is a woman. We can do this without having to so self consciously role play opposite sex 'performances' - but we are also free to do that should we like ( within certain social constraints)"

The fact that you consider organic personality inclinations/preferences as a 'performance' is more a reflection of your own rigid expectations of conformity rather than any credible analysis of human behaviour. That you seriously believe there's no biological naturally occurring autonomy that drives preferences is quite the tell.

But I suggest that denying the reality of biological sex and the consequences of it is a fool's game. To a large extent we are our bodies; we are our circumstances. We are not all 'free spiritual beings' or 'souls' floating around in a world of dense and restrictive matter looking for a place to call home. We are all born into a certain set of conditions which shape our experience. We didn't 'choose' any of them.

Sex Matters, and it matters to women, especially......which is why we have developed certain protections and safeguards. You cannot change your sex...though as you intimate....our sex does determine and shape our life experiences and choices...no matter how much we long to be transcendent beings with no restriction.

Noone is denying the reality of biological sex. If trans people did they wouldn’t need to go to the extent to change their bodies medically. What you are attempting to do here is conflate this strawman with conflicting rights. Again as mentioned upthread, groups experiencing conflicting rights isn't a licence to deny their existence nor is there an inability to manage them.

False equivalence AKA apples & oranges. A native American is not born with an innate preference for their culture. They maybe raised in one & may form an attachment but their socially constructed classification depends on them being part of that culture by blood. A trans man much like a butch woman has an inborn inclination towards a masculine temperament/aesthetic. Their social classification depends on a different set of criteria.

"Someone being psychotic or whatever does not prevent their sex being accurately recorded, and homicide is the most well-documented crime type."

Err, this discussion is about whether the perpetrators are trans remember which by all accounts isn't recorded or recorded consistently or may not be an accurate description when reported.

You’ve heard an argument that offending rates are unreliable and are continuing to apply it where it really doesn’t fit.

Um, no. I'm making the argument that offending rates are the only accurate measure of crime rates of which WE CAN'T KNOW FOR SURE because of under reporting.

For the love of god…….

www.bbc.com/news/articles/c5y0el00j75o

Sorry I can’t take you seriously while you continue to do two things simultaneously:

Seek to discredit homicide offending stats for increasingly bizarre and esoteric reasons. Someone being psychotic or whatever does not prevent their sex being accurately recorded, and homicide is the most well-documented crime type. You’ve heard an argument that offending rates are unreliable and are continuing to apply it where it really doesn’t fit.

Then turn round and make hand-wavy claims of your own based entirely in claims about relative offending rates.

This is schrodingers crime stat. All very complicated and difficult when it doesn’t suit your argument. But conclusive and unproblematic when you think it supports your argument.

Reporting isn't offending. See rape. And murder reporting doesn't include missing persons. In any case, particularly in the case of murder, the perpetrator may be suffering from some form of psychopathy, severe personality disorder/mental illness where they may under the delusion they are trans, the antichrist or under the instructions of god & not be.

Again, there's also the matter of statistical insignificance & broad group attribution.

But tell me what you think about this. Why would it be that straight men are more violent than gay men, lesbians are more violent than straight women & lesbians are more violent than straight women? Is it masculine characteristics of aggression/(disagreeability personality trait) that the more violent groups share? And what does this mean for transwomen who probably share more agreeable personality traits than disagreeable?

I suspect what drives offending is a lot more complicated than people think.

On average behaviours that differentiate them from men. For example, like the violence that GC women like to claim should disqualify men from using their spaces.

Seriously? I have explain to you the difference in fashion choices & other obvious categories the sexes make? What la la land are you living in?

Ive already listed the different choices several times as in consumerist, employment, special interest & life choices.

You can google for a plethora of evidence proving women & men on average make different choices in these areas. That you are being obtuse about the bleedin' obvious doesn't do your credibility any favours.

Perhaps you could start with a summary of what 'the evidence of choices existing' means and what conclusions can be made from it? Or you could continue to refuse to answer. Your choice.

The point you are spectacularly (conveniently) missing is its not necessary I do & any precise claims as to why would be speculative anyway as opposed to the fact gendered behaviour exists by virtue of the evidence of different choices existing.

Of course you can attempt to avoid all of this by forcing a diversion to speculative claims but it won't save you.

I'm not suggesting anything. I'm waiting for you to describe what you mean. Your inability to do so is not helping your argument.

Are you seriously suggesting there are no gendered differences in consumerist, employment, special interest & life choices?

Clue: I don't have to list what those inclinations are that drive those choices to prove that gendered differences in behaviour exist. The evidence of different choices existing speaks for itself.

What choices? If you don't describe what you mean, how can anyone have a serious conversation about it, let alone agree with it.

Please describe the gendered inclinations and what groups they are assigned to. I want to hear your point of view.

So if I am naturally inclined to spend my money on beads, feathers and buckskins, have a special interest in spending my weekends on vision quests and sweat lodges, and choose to go to work in a casino on a tribal reservation, that makes me in fact a Native American and the actual Native Americans just have to suck it up and give me tribal privileges?