Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Feminism: Sex and gender discussions

Trans Women Should Be Allowed In Women Only Spaces

341 replies

KiBob · 18/11/2018 16:18

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 - so this might be a bit outdated - 30 years is pretty long.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!

OP posts:
Thread gallery
5
KiBob · 24/11/2018 10:51

In the media in the UK between and including 2014 and 2018 to date, the were reports of at least 128 transwomen being convicted (and not at any point acquitted) of crimes. Majoritatively sexual (65) and violent crime (49) - and some murders (6).

In the media in the UK over that same time period there were reports of at least 2 transmen being convicted (and not at any point acquitted) of crimes. The crimes committed were:

  1. malicious communications and attempting to incite a child to engage in sexual activity.
  2. Perverting the course of justice.

As you can clearly see I must be jumping through some pretty major mathematical hoops to get those figures to match my rhetoric hey!

FFS

OP posts:
Justhadathought · 24/11/2018 11:12

Paris Lees may pass as a woman - due to all of the surgery; a naturally slender physique, and much, much practice at the performance of femininity. However, when watching an episode of Celebrity Island in which s/he featured I was completely bemused at how artificial it all looked and seemed. Swimming across a lagoon, exhausted; then to say that all s/he wanted was " scented candles" was an open-mouthed moment.

All of these people trying to force the idea that Trans Women are Women' seem to have little empathy or understanding of actual women, and the situations they face on account of being women; in a female body. Camp'ness and effeminacy is a superficial approximation of womanhood. A mere dressing up and performance.

the trans-women who are largely 'accepted' by women, are those who have genuine empathy and understanding, and as a result who do not attempt to force their way in; who know they are male, even as they identify with women.

EarlyWalker · 24/11/2018 11:13

Because I was responding to this also - As has been established on multiple threads, you don't have a coherent definition of what a "trans woman" is, other than that they have a bit of paper saying so. This is not just about self ID

EarlyWalker · 24/11/2018 11:18

That isn't the Stonewall definition. You're a transphobe to Stonewall and most Transactivists I don’t care if they think I’m transphobic, I think they are transphobic as they’re doing genuine trans people a great disservice.

KiBob do I really need to keep explaining to you why a website who selectively chooses which media reports to put up may not be the best place to get reliable data? As opposed to the MOJ. Perhaps someone else could have a go.

mummmy2017 · 24/11/2018 11:49

Are there any statistics for men pre op, who are not even having treatment, but would want to use the rooms set aside for pure born females.

Electron1 · 24/11/2018 12:09

I'm generally wary of self-ID, but I've nonetheless not seen a decent explanation of why some classes can be analysed by their criminal tendencies whilst others seemingly can't.

Because women are forced into it. Because the liberal support for "gendered souls" is pathetically naïve and ivory towered. Because the magical thinking that men are women really needs to be punctured. You refer to the "bible" up thread as a sneer about the stats that were put together, and yet that data is a response to the ideological "saints and sinners" religious fervour demonstrated by the liberal believers. Non believer's are bigots according to the most "fundamental". We are the sinners for failing to believe. So berating women for "painting" just sounds like more of this bigot shit. Every time women respond to the "painting" accusation with proportionate data this is then dismissed as more "painting" and incorrect. It's no wonder women here are bored of this pathetic carry on.

Electron1 · 24/11/2018 12:12

do I really need to keep explaining to you why a website who selectively chooses which media reports to put up may not be the best place to get reliable data?

Not really no, but no doubt you will.

EarlyWalker · 24/11/2018 12:21

Electron so you disagree that the data is not sufficient? The above quoted post was not me but you seem to be referring to me in your text.
No one is saying you need to agree that transwoman are woman, I don’t believe they are biological woman I believe they are transwoman and there’s nothing wrong with that.
What I don’t agree with as I’ve said over and over on here is constantly misusing statistics, or having half a picture on them and painting the rest in order to make transwoman look dangerous.
If you think they are dangerous - that is absolutely your right to believe and campaign as you wish but you cannot keep acting as if this is a scientifically proven fact when it is not.
If you think the data is correct, then argue your case because so far nobody has been able to disprove what I’ve said r.e the data. I’m not arguing transwoman dont offend at the same rate as men (although I could definitely twist the statistics to make it look like the same rate of woman if you want)
I’m arguing that your statistics showing that they transwomen offend at the same rate as men are unproven and unreliable and cannot be used as fact.
Continue using them by all means, but mostpeople are not stupid and it’s fairly easy to find the holes which makes your whole argument fall apart.

Weetabixandshreddies · 24/11/2018 12:25

EarlyWalker

Well said.

VickyEadie · 24/11/2018 12:30

Men offend at rates far higher than women. Self-id opens up all women's spaces to any man who wants to be in there, knowing he cannot be challenged any more.

I do not want men in spaces where I am vulnerable or need privacy from men. I don't care if they're "real" (sic) transwomen or the opportunistic men entering women's spaces on the coattails of self-id. I just don't want people born with penises (a catch-all term, if you like) in there. And the vast majority of women do not want this, either (and the ones that think they don't mind will mind if this goes ahead).

The stats show that men offend at rates far higher than women. That's all I need to know.

KiBob · 24/11/2018 12:42

do I really need to keep explaining to you why a website who selectively chooses which media reports to put up may not be the best place to get reliable data?

They include ALL media reports they can find of ALL trans people committing and being found guilty of crime.

OP posts:
Weetabixandshreddies · 24/11/2018 12:53

They include ALL media reports they can find of ALL trans people committing and being found guilty of crime.

They might well do but the point is that it is all that they can find. That isn't necessarily accurate. There will be some that aren't reported or some that are reported wrongly, some that are exaggerated. They aren't a reliable source.

KiBob · 24/11/2018 13:23

For each one they then go into the case and find out the details - were they acquitted, were they charged, did the charges stick.

And, yes, they may well have missed some.

Do you know how to calculate result significance? I don't. But I suspect that a result where, of 130 samples, 128 are M2F and only 2 are F2M that there is a high degree of likelihood that the result shows a significant correlation between M2F and crime.

OP posts:
KiBob · 24/11/2018 13:24

PS. As compared to F2M!

OP posts:
Electron1 · 24/11/2018 13:58

you cannot keep acting as if this is a scientifically proven fact when it is not.

Who actually is? "Science" is a weird categorisation here?

Again you talk about "painting". That is again weird. Who is actually saying ALL transwomen are dangerous.

If you mean that people FAIL to say NAMALT when discussing sex segregation then you should understand that posters here are using the assumption that NAMALT is a given. Otherwise you are suggesting that by talking about male offending we are saying all men are criminal offenders and the entire male population ought to be imprisoned.

Its a bit wearying listening to the NAMALT when no-one is saying ALL. Thank very much for pointing out NAMALT over and over again. We get it. We were not "painting" it in the first place but it's very kind of you to remind people not to "paint". NAMALT NAMALT NAMALT, there is that better?
So stop accusing people of PAINTING ALL. Thanks for listening.

Electron1 · 24/11/2018 14:00

If anyone here is actually using statistics to PAINT ALL and don't believe NAMALT please do tell us now...

Electron1 · 24/11/2018 14:09

And again, the data produced in the MoJ FOI request is exactly what it is - DATA. It isn't definitive proof of prevalence. It's INFORMATION.

All it is proof of is that the known paraphilia of fetishism is present in males in prison that ID as women. Something we are told NEVER HAPPENS as is of no risk to women. Despite it happening. Its proof that the denial of a known criminal paraphilia is an unreasonable denial.

ScottCheggJnr · 24/11/2018 19:38

So, again....why can't I say "I don't want to be incarcerated with black people because they as a class commit more violent crime"?

I've still not read a feasible explanation for this awkward question.

R0wantrees · 24/11/2018 20:05

James Kirkup wrote about the BBC fact check referred to in thread. The Spectator, August 2018:
'Is the BBC scared of the transgender debate?'
(extract)
"Some recent BBC coverage of transgender issues fails to meet the usual standards of its journalism. Those failings, in turn, raise some wider questions for the BBC on this topic.

The first piece that isn’t up to scratch is this Reality Check about transgender prisoners, published earlier this week. Reality Check, when it’s good, is first-class public service journalism, the sort of rigorous, evidence-based analysis that British journalism and politics desperately need more of. This isn’t good. The piece purports to test an estimate made by Fair Play for Women (FPFW), a feminist group, that 41 per cent of trans women in jail are sex offenders. That’s significantly higher than the 15 per cent of the whole prison population jailed for sexual crimes.

FPFW is concerned that allowing male-born sex offenders to be imprisoned with female-born inmates (who are vulnerable and very often have been victims of sexual abuse) puts women at risk. For the avoidance of doubt, I’m not pretending to be neutral here: I think that concern is a valid one and I’m not convinced current prison policy has sufficient regard for the wellbeing of female prisoners in this context. (There’s more to come on this issue, incidentally, but much of it is subject to court action and can’t yet be reported. But I think there are some awkward questions coming for prison chiefs and politicians alike, in due course.)

The BBC seeks to test the FPFW figure of 41 per cent mainly by way of official Ministry of Justice figures, released following a BBC request under the Freedom of Information Act. Those figures show that 60 of 125 transgender inmates were serving sentences for sexual offences. That’s 48 per cent. That is, to put it mildly, a striking figure. But having obtained that information, through good and proper journalism, the BBC Reality Check team goes to great lengths to tell readers to discount it. The piece is laden with caveats and warnings about those figures, some of which are badly flawed. For instance, the repeated insistence that “we don’t know the gender of the perpetrators in these cases”.

The implication there is that some of the 60 trans sex offenders might be transmen, people born female and now identifying as male. Put simply, this is bordering on offensive, the sort of “Reverse Victim and Offender” tactics that a certain sort of man uses when debating issues of violence against women. Because the sort of fact-checking analytical journalism that Reality Check is supposed to do would show the only reasonable interpretation of those figures for 60 sex offenders is that they relate to people born male who now identify as female.

I say that for several reasons. First, the sexual offences committed by those 60 trans offenders:

27 convictions for rape (plus a further five of attempted rape)
13 convictions for possessing, distributing or making indecent images of children
13 convictions for sexual assault or attempted sexual assault
Nine convictions for causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity
Seven convictions for sexual activity with a child
Seven convictions for indecent assault or gross indecency
These are crimes that are overwhelmingly committed by male-born people, also known as men; a vanishingly small proportion of sexual offence convictions are against women. The latest prison population figures show that of the entire female prison population, only 128 were sentenced for sexual offences. So unless there’s evidence to the contrary (and the BBC certainly hasn’t found any), it’s reasonable to start from the assumption those 60 criminals were born male.

Second, the known facts of transgender inmates in the prison estate. It is an established fact there are some male-born people in the female estate: that’s the whole point of this debate. But are there female-born people in the male estate? These would be people who were born female and later in life identified themselves as male and were sentenced to a custodial sentence, exercising their right under current prison policy to request to serve their sentence in a male prison alongside male-born prisoners. As far as I can establish, there are no such inmates; Frances Crook of the Howard League for Penal Reform, one of the country’s leading authorities on the prison system, also says: “I’ve not heard of trans men going to men’s prisons, they simply would not be safe.”

Yet the Reality Check team seems not to have even tried to check these things. Instead they are inviting readers to infer that it’s possible that a significant number of those sexual offenders might be people were born female and now identify as male. That is poor journalism that verges on being misleading.

There are various other evasions in the Reality Check piece, all seeming to try to lead the reader away from the obvious conclusion that the Fair Play for Women figures were essentially accurate and that a disproportionately high number of transgender prisoners are in jail for sexual offences.

Just for good measure, Reality Check (a supposedly objective fact-check) chucks in a bit of commentary from Jane Fae, a “transgender journalist and campaigner” making the wholly subjective assertion that the public will “misinterpret” those official figures and that “the fall-out in terms of violence and abuse will, in some cases, be significant.” Perhaps that is a valid case to argue, but it is not one that belongs in a Reality Check piece.

In truth, the public is in little danger of misinterpreting those figures, or even of knowing about them, because the BBC did its best to bury them. While most Reality Check pieces are featured on the homepage of BBC News, this one was not apparently placed there at any point. BBC News has made little effort to publicise what might reasonably be considered newsworthy information about a matter of public interest.

The overall impression given is that someone at the BBC set out with the hope of debunking that Fair Play for Women calculation, but uncovered evidence suggesting that calculation was perfectly reasonable, then made significant efforts to avoid saying so or telling anyone that, yes, a lot of male-born offenders who identify themselves as women are in jail for sexual crimes, including crimes committed against women." (continues with discussion of BBC coverage of non-binary cllr Gregor Murray)

blogs.spectator.co.uk/2018/08/is-the-bbc-scared-of-the-transgender-debate/

KiBob · 24/11/2018 20:28

Thank you for that R0wantrees - worrying.

ScottCheggJnr - dunno... if you're a man then the answer perhaps is that you cannot make that request because your space is not a protected one, plus the next answer.... And if you're a woman or a man then the answer is perhaps that there is no evidence whatsoever that black people are more likely to commit criminal acts against you in prison than are white people?

OP posts:
VickyEadie · 24/11/2018 20:41

ScottCheggJnr

Your argument suggests we don't have separate spaces for women at all and all any men in who wish to enter.

KiBob · 24/11/2018 21:00

ScottCheggJnr additionally to my previous thoughts... the very reason there may be an increased prevalence of crime amongst any group may be removed in an incarceration setting... such as poverty and oppression for example.

OP posts:
HouseMouseQueen1969 · 24/11/2018 21:19

I had my day on Kialo as well and it was also an argument about trans crap. They refused to acknowledge biological sex class and when I stated that men in wigs are actually MEN they threw a fit. I stopped going there. I had contact with MANY of the admins and they all refused to acknowledge sex class.

To top it all off, it was my first experience with Kialo, and I never went back.

You can't argue with people who mangle language and refuse to accept material reality.

EarlyWalker · 24/11/2018 21:57

Ok then. Let’s just ignore everything we know about how to read data, ignore any variables, ignore that we are missing half (a valuable half) of said data and just come up with our own conclusions and treat them as fact then.

Problem solved, you win, glad you could all engage your brains enough to come up with this valuable conclusion. Grin

Btw data shows 125 transpeople in prison out of an estimated 600,000. This is 0.02% of the population. There are 4,045 woman in prison out of an estimated 32 million. This is 0.012%. There are 79,950 men in prison out of an estimated 31 million. This is 0.25% of men.
Therefore men are more likely to offend than transgender people by 1100%.

Transwoman reportedly outweigh Transwoman at a ratio 4:1, with 100 transwoman in prison and 25 transmen in prison, the crime rates stand at 4:1 showing statistically a transwoman is no more likely to offend than a transman. (Who by your definition is a biological woman, no?)

29% of transgender people in America reported they lived in poverty as opposed to 14% of the general population, 30% have been homeless at some point, they are 4x more likely to be unemployed. All of the above are leading factors for increased chances of being sent to prison.

Do you see how I can manipulate these statistics to show what I want it to show? I’ve not changed any information that’s out there and that’s been mentioned on this thread but my data shows a different story.

VickyEadie · 24/11/2018 22:11

Women and girls should not have to tolerate men in their spaces. That's all there is to it.

Swipe left for the next trending thread