Does MN have a problem with trans people? **MNHQ edited title as OP has apologised for 'accusatory' tone**

[tryandempathise]

Seem to be threads constantly on the issue of trans.

Why?

Is it because it conflicts with the idea of sex as a construct?

Is it an age thing?

There must be mums on here with trans kids - do you just stay out of it?

Why the obsession with the idea of being attacked by trans women? Is it not the modern equivalent of homophobic blokes all thinking gay men want to rape them?

Talking nails it yet again 👏⭐️

Yeah I meant gender when I said sex. I'll read the other thread and be back if I still think you're all wrong

How can you possibly say "we're all wrong" if you haven't spoken to or read each and every post by every person posting?

This is a discussion forum - and there is often disagreement. But it is a place in which gender critical people can meet. It also hosts people who have trans children and the wives and partners of trans people who want to share their experiences and sound off....There is a very broad spectrum of people from all walks and experiences of life.

@OldCrone

Ah yes, that is mostly the author of that blog post writing their interpretation. The image I posted is of the author of the paper they used to make these assertions and the author denies that interpretation completely.

@BertrandRussell

It was the Sweden 2011 study they are talking about. The author refuted the claims being made here.

So basically the study you're using to support your claim that trans women are as dangerous as men was denied by the person responsible for the study. The author did a whole interview to specifically address it

This study dates from 1988 so uses terms and classifications that may upset the monitors (and the mods) - those who today would be called transgender-with-a-gender-identity instead of transvestites and transsexuals as in the study - but it does serve to highlight heightened risk factors in XY persons with atypical sexual identities.

(I've worded that as best I can to get it past the censors).

pdfs.semanticscholar.org/5b1a/172e2ea1fbafa1e95f9b7c71f8c464e44357.pdf

Multiple Paraphilic Diagnoses among Sex Offenders (Abel, 1988)

If you're going to say that you want transwomen to no longer be treated as part of the group 'men', you can't just decide to treat them as their own new group starting with a blank slate, as if none of the research conducted into men's behaviour is relevant to them - at the very least you have to start by copying over what we have learnt about men to them first, and then refine that with more research that is specific to men who have transitioned.

Maybe that would lead to them being calculated to be a lower risk, maybe not, but you can't assume it from the start. Transitioning doesn't reset people's brains and personalities to some kind of 'officially harmless' default starting status. If you have no trans-specific data, you have to start by using the data from the larger group of which they are initially a member, which is men.

It seems the only reason people think they are dangerous is because they were born male. Nothing other than that

Women/female bodied people are, and always have been, vulnerable to male violence, sexual assault, and to physical intimidation - for the obvious biological reasons. This is why single sex spaces for intimate & personal bodily functions/procedures and practices are required.

It's not just about violence, though - but about being subject to lascivious and predatory & intimidating sexualised behaviour: cameras under doors; masturbatory practices; general creepy behaviour.

There is plenty of evidence, already, that this is coming from trans people too - especially now the trans umbrella includes so many disparate people & groups of people.

It is about women's sports and services too.

So basically the study you're using to support your claim that trans women are as dangerous as men

Who is doing that? I don't use it for that because of the tiny numbers. Its not a "claim". To argue that this group of males is less dangerous than the rest of the male sex class requires proof, from you, as it is in fact you who is making the extraordinary claim here.

If you have no trans-specific data, you have to start by using the data from the larger group of which they are initially a member, which is men.

Yes, and the onus is on you to prove anything you claim is different.

That quote from Djehne says that because the number of convictions for violent crimes in the cohort was small, if you divide the dataset in two then the finding no longer reaches the significance threshold in the second half of the dataset.

Unfortunately for her, that's statistical malpractice. And her published finding that transwomen are about 30 times more violent than women is backed up by a lot of other data - for example data on prisoners.

How safe was Karen White for the women Karen was locked up with a) during Karen's initial crime of multiple rape on a female ward, which left a woman so severely injured she may never be able to have children, and b) during Karen's incarceration in a women's prison where Karen assaulted several more women while waiting trial for the first round of taking full advantage of their female only environment to access victims? There are plenty of other cases, as mentioned in the graphic above.

What is the point in denying this?

What evidence? Please provide it here..

@langcleg

From that paper:

"The
highest percentage (52%) of individuals
with only one paraphilia were those in-
volved with transsexualism. "

So what they found was that the trans people were most likely to only be trans and not have paedophillic or incestuous fantasies or urges

Not also have*

It seems the only reason people think they are dangerous is because they were born male. Nothing other than that

That's correct. It's an actuarial approach to risk assessment. Every insurance premium you've ever paid depends upon it.

Males are the only ones who can rape you. They commit 98% of sex crime and 90% of violent crime.

Males are orders of magnitude more risk to females than females are and one of the risk management strategies society has devised to combat this is sex segregation in certain situations.

Unsure why you find this a difficult concept.

From my hairdressers view, it seems there is a lot of talk with no real evidence.

I get that we lack specific research.

I get that men commit most violent crime.

I get that most men commit no violent crime.

Because I get those 3 things, it doesn't seem extremely unsafe to have someone who was born a man but dresses and presents as a women in my toilet or changing room. It doesn't make sense to me.

So what they found was that the trans people were most likely to only be trans and not have paedophillic or incestuous fantasies or urges

Er... while being sex offenders.

I know that the law says women can only sexually assault you but my same butch cousin has also been sexually assaulted by a women who put something inside of her. I dont think she feels less like she has been raped because the person is not male.

Women and men have the propensity to be sexually abusive. It doesn't hurt less when a women does it.

They counted being trans as a sex offence or deviance in itself. Like they used to count being gay as a deviance/crime..

Because I get those 3 things, it doesn't seem extremely unsafe to have someone who was born a man but dresses and presents as a women in my toilet or changing room. It doesn't make sense to me.

So because you're okay with it, everyone else has to be?

That is why it says:
"of individuals
with only one paraphilia"

paraphilia
/ˌparəˈfɪlɪə/
nounPSYCHIATRY
a condition characterized by abnormal sexual desires, typically involving extreme or dangerous activities

Because I get those 3 things, it doesn't seem extremely unsafe to have someone who was born a man but dresses and presents as a women in my toilet or changing room. It doesn't make sense to me.

So we're back to the good old chestnut that's been on several threads the past few days: this is lovely for you. That's great. Well done. I'm happy you feel safe in toilets and changing rooms with biological males, that's wonderful for you.

Can you understand that some women don't feel like that? And will never feel like that?

Can you understand that it is wrong to force those women into situations that they may find dangerous, distressing, frightening, intolerable or even excludes them entirely from those spaces just because you personally don't suffer with those feelings?

So what they found was that the trans people were most likely to only be trans and not have paedophillic or incestuous fantasies or urge

It is not just about "paedophillic urges or fantasies" ( but see the case of Aimee Challoner and partner regarding that) but about the nature of Autogynephilia and fetish.......

Also the violence on display from trans activists whenever women legitimately meet to discuss issues, does nothing to detract from the observation that men, even those who call themselves trans, can be, and often are, violent.