Who is listening to the Today show: debate over Trans rights and the parliamentary bill

[Bovneydazzlers]

Pleasantly surprised so far that the BBC are giving balanced picture and giving platform to Janice Turner as well as Stonewall.

I think more could be said that hormone blockers have side effects and likely to lead down path to being sterile etc though.

You can't tell.
The numbers are tiny, and it isn't broken down into male versus female. It may well be that someone FtM is as likely as any other female to be murdered, and any MtF as likely as any other male.

The numbers are per million, but the GIRES numbers say that there are only 650,000 gender non-conforming individuals.

What is being taught to kids in schools is indeed that there are pink brains and blue brains.

Point your own school in this direction instead:

www.transgendertrend.com/schools/

What needs to be protected is gender non-conformity, so boys who like playing with dolls aren't bullied and girls with short hair and no make up are celebrated.

Climate change deniers is a great example. After all the POTUS is one as are a lot of heads of states.

TheHumanRace

Yes. Although, as numbers are so difficult to determine, it’s estimated. But of course, the more trans-people there are, the lower the percentage becomes.

Which ever way you cut it up, murder of trans-people in this country are not a statistic that can be used to bolster any kind of ‘trans are murdered in the hundreds’ kind of argument.

The trans people most at risk of being murdered are Brazilian prostitutes. Prostitution is virtually the most dangerous occupation on Earth. Trans or not.

It's worth remembering that 13 women per day are murdered in Brazil. The murder rate is extremely high for everyone.

Some analysis of the data I saw showed that a white American man significantly reduced his risk of being murdered by transitioning.

Great post stopmakingsense

Thank you for the links - such simple effective explanations.

All this pink or blue brain maloney.

Maloney! Is that a Freudian slip?

I think homicide rates are higher in the US, so figures for the UK would be different.

The ratesof hate crimes against different groups are compiled here (for England and Wales) 2016-17

www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/652136/hate-crime-1617-hosb1717.pdf

All types of hate crime have increased since figures were first recorded in 2011, which is due they say to better recording and awareness.

The highest number by far (over 62 000) were race hate crimes; the next highest was sexual orientation (over 9 000); then religion (5949) then disability (5558) and then transgender (1248). Transgender was the least dealt with in all policing areas.

However, one needs to work this out with knowledge of population size - how many of the population are trans, for example, so what is the crime rate per person?

In terms of the murder rates, the ONS state the numbers are too small to give details without it being tantamount to giving away personal details

Hate crimes against transgender FOI response

I listened to that and thought the world has gone around the bend.
Adults can do what they like but I'd be looking at child abuse if a child came home age 7 and expressed disgust at their genitals.
Worse if a parent thinks pirates are for boys?!? The whole programme was bad for my blood pressure.

I got the flat earth abuse when arguing against TW Jillian Bearden placing as top woman cyclist in an Arizona road race - by other TW cyclists. They have a TW team now competing in the US.

Those hate crime stats are sobering. I wonder if more police forces recognised gender hate crime then how many more would be recorded.

Cat-calling and wolf-whistling now classed as gender-hate crimes by Avon and Somerset Police

Much as I hate all things Murdoch, we have to be grateful to the Times (especially the wonderful Janice Turner), and also to the New Statesman & Independent for publishing gender critical articles. The BBC was fully signed up to the "trans as progressive" narrative until some of the print media broke ranks and started to question the wisdom of encouraging teenagers to sterilise themselves.

The BBC's understanding of science is abysmal; they don't see it as important. Their journalists are overwhelmingly arts/humanities graduates, so don't understand when they are being fed nonsense (see also the MMR scare) and their producers don't care.

I am a humanities graduate, I am capable of understanding the science behind this, so I think it is more about being liberal and progressive without realising it is regressive.

And to be fair, re MMR, the research paper was published in the Lancet, which is a long-established, peer-reviewed medical journal. The trans* agenda is an internet phenomenon without comparable research behind it. So while both are based on dodgy/false science, one came with rather more credibility.

Apologies Coco, I didn’t mean there are no non-science graduates who understand the science. My point was more about the culture of the BBC. They don’t see science as important or worthy of accuracy. The Today programme uses ‘bacteria’ and ‘virus’ as interchangeable, for example, which - in scientific terms- is like confusing Spain and Serbia or Milton and Martin Amis.

It annoys me that they don't pull out the most important bit: that regardless whether you can change sex or not, and whether children are being pushed into hormones that are potentially dangerous or not; the proposed new bill by Maria Millar means you won't have to go through any of it anyway. I'd say this is seperate from the trans issues and it's getting lost in the debate.