Trans Women Should Be Allowed In Women Only Spaces

[KiBob]

I posted a few days ago that I need help arguing a case on the debating website Kialo. Thanks to your suggestions I've got one claim accepted that I was struggling with.

I'm now trying to get a new claim past admins.

As a supporting claim to:

"Allowing anyone who identifies as female into women-only spaces makes those spaces worse for cis women".

I put this:

"Trans women are 6 times more likely to commit a crime and 18 times more likely to commit a violent crime compared to female controls as found by this study In Sweden in 2011". With a link to this study:
journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

Admin have responded:

"Hm, interesting link. However, the results don't differentiate between trans men and trans women, and also state this: "Transsexual individuals were at increased risk of being convicted for any crime or violent crime after sex reassignment (Table 2); this was, however, only significant in the group who underwent sex reassignment before 1989." - so this might be a bit outdated - 30 years is pretty long.
Further up, in the Abstract, under results it also says "Female-to-males, but not male-to-females, had a higher risk for criminal convictions than their respective birth sex controls."

Can you point me to the exact place where you get your numbers? Thanks!"

Help!

women's spaces in the first place - the no is never enough for them it would seem...
I never said the no is not enough, I’ve said the opposite.

Stats came from MOJ and FPFW. As I’ve said it states 100 transgender inmates in men’s prisons, 25 transgender inmates in woman’s prisons, it does not state their gender at the time and MOJ would not comment on if these were FTM or MTF, based on the fact FPFW went of the assumption originally that all 100 males in the men’s prisons were FTM it is the same assumption that those in woman’s prisons are FTM.
Which is also why the data is so difficult to read from as we only have half a story and anyone can manipulate this data to make an argument for either side.

I’ve said it states 100 transgender inmates in men’s prisons, 25 transgender inmates in woman’s prisons, it does not state their gender at the time and MOJ would not comment on if these were FTM or MTF, based on the fact FPFW went of the assumption originally that all 100 males in the men’s prisons were FTM it is the same assumption that those in woman’s prisons are FTM.

No, that's complete speculation. We know there are males in women's prisons without GRC.

I read back through your posts, and you are quite disingenuously promoting this assumption you have personally made as a matter settled by the MOJ.

No we know that there is one MTF currently in woman’s prisons, Jessica (forgot last name - also don’t know if this person holds a GRC)

MOJ have not confirmed any others. So the stats don’t back up your ‘facts’
After giving my stats I said they were used as example as to how things can be manipulated, you’ve proved my point - even if you don’t quite understand it, so thanks.

Again, where did the MOJ confirm the person you mention as the only MTF in women's prisons?

The policy was changed at around the same time as the Miller Trans Inquiry to make it much more possible to put a non GRC holding MTF in a women's prison. Why would they do this?

If even one of those 100 trans prisoners in male prisons is a transman, I'll be shocked.

I think the BBC Fact Check quoted someone in the prison service who said they didn't know of any "because it wouldn't be safe".

Misandry there!

If even one of those 100 trans prisoners in male prisons is a transman, I'll be shocked.

Francis Crook adressed this in a Mail on Sunday article June 2018:

'As more trans women who were convicted as men hope to follow rapist Martin Ponting into female wings, prison governors fear vulnerable inmates could be attacked'
(extract)
"Ms Crook, executive director of the Howard League for Penal Reform, added: ‘These men are not transitioning because they like women and want to be a woman, but in order to exert a new kind of control and dominance over women, a sort of infiltration.

‘Moreover, the process is inherently discriminatory. A woman identifying as a man could not be transferred to a man’s jail because placing a person with female attributes into a prison to live with 1,000 men, all using communal showers and living areas, would put them in serious danger.’ (continues)

www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-5798945/Trans-women-convicted-men-attack-vulnerable-inmates.html

@HouseMouseQueen1969 which debate?

It's not all bad, I started and admin this one. I've allowed counter arguments, and then added theses to discredit them (and in some cases to back them up, even when I don't agree)... because having the full debate in the open is the absolute best way to show you're right - or (sometimes I guess, but not yet) find out you're wrong...

www.kialo.com/does-transgenderism-exist-18381

or (sometimes I guess, but not yet) find out you're wrong...

isn’t the point of your OP that you were intact, proved wrong?

Only, the OP has not been proved wrong. Not at all.

I’ve never seen a more classic example of “pigeon chess.”

Sticking your fingers in your ears, repeating the same points over and over again and stubbornly refusing to understand counterpoints until people give up trying to talk to you is not the same as proving an argument wrong.

www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Pigeon%20chess

Did no one read the OP? Just me then, ok.

Point is that she gave statistics and stated them as fact when met with an answer telling her that the statistics are not concrete as she presented them, she has asked for where to get concrete statistics from that match her viewpoint.

I have simply said that none of the statistics or data provides this as fact unless you create your own assumptions along with it.

The data she used was based on 300 people in Sweden, the statistics did not differentiate between transmen and transwoman and only shows Male criminality patterns in those transitioned prior to 1989, those after that showed no correlation.

It’s also worth noting that these same individuals that this data refers too are now receiving compensation from the Swedish government as transgender people transitioning in these times were foced to be sterilised. I know that’s what poise Parker wanted for trans people, but i think anyone forcibly sterilised is probably a pretty vulrenable individual and if it were a group of woman in prison who had been, we would be using making our excuses for them.

Your counter arguments seem to be ‘no trans people in the toilets’ or whatever, which is not the point I was making. I was saying this data is unreliable and unproven but fingers in ears as always.

I and others explained pages and pages ago why splitting the data up in that way makes no sense. You didn’t engage with that at all, you just did the pigeon chess thing and repeated yourself. There’s no point in going into it again as you just say the same thing over and over!

What do you mean splitting the data up that way makes no sense?
That’s the way the data was collected! If you don’t think the researchers did a very good job you probably shouldn’t be quoting their data.

The data she used was based on 300 people in Sweden, the statistics did not differentiate between transmen and transwoman and only shows Male criminality patterns in those transitioned prior to 1989, those after that showed no correlation.

The data also did not show a lack of correlation, as was established, what, 10 pages ago?