@MonsignorMirth
It is also common for people to point out flaws with sampling, that people have self-selected to fill in the survey (I didn't realise you could compel people to fill in forms but you learn a new thing every day on the feminist boards, right?)
Stop, stop, my third-hand embarrassment can't take it.
"self-selection bias" isn't a phenomenon feminists have made up!
If you want to critique something someone has actually said, you need to quote the text/speech in context rather than pretend you understood it and 'summarise' it with the helpful 'blah blah it's boring' addition.
Remember, suggestions - you were the one asking for data on 'things' (you couldn't define) happening to 'people' (you couldn't define). You refused to answer whether my definition of 'women' would be acceptable to you as an example of this, so we are left none the wiser as to what it is you think words mean.
www.transgendertrend.com/the-suicide-myth/
See here for ref. to self-selection
"We don’t believe that the suicide history of just 27 self-selected trans people is sufficiently large for parents to make life-changing decisions for their children."
(The research actually includes 120 trans people, but the 27 referred to are under the age of 26)
(This, despite this research the statement refers to finding statistically significant evidence for trans people at greatly elevated risk of suicidality):
www.queerfutures.co.uk/wp-content/uploads/2015/04/RARE_Research_Report_PACE_2015.pdf
All rates of young Trans people in our sample are particularly high
when compared with their cisgender counterparts, with about half
reporting lifetime suicide attempts and over 80% indicating lifetime
suicide ideation and self-harm ideation and experience. These findings
are consistent with findings that suggest increased suicide risk for
Trans young people (D’Augelli et al., 2005; Wang et al., 2012; Xavier et
al., 2007), possibly associated with gender non-conformity (Fitzpatrick
et al., 2005; LeVasseur et al., 2013).*
Of course self selection it is not something that GC feminists made up, how could it be, given its ubiquity? But it is presented on the transgendertrend page in such a way that a study should be dismissed altogether because of this self-selection.
The reality is that the vast majority of surveys are self-selection - people choose to fill them in - they select themselves. You go to the supermarket and you see someone doing a survey and you think 'That sounds interesting, I'll do that' then you have biased the survey because you want to fill it in and there are another 10 people that walked past that didn't want to fill it in - so we don't know what they think.
If you've got a mechanism for forcing those other 10 people to fill in a form that they don't want to (with no incentives), then well done you, you will have solved the self-selection bias problem for surveys.
So it's disingenuous to write-off studies of this nature, considering that it is an issue that affects the vast, vast majority of surveys carried out. Women who fill in domestic abuse information have also self-selected, etc etc.
There is also the huge problem of the tiny minority of people that identify as trans for survey purposes - it is simply not feasible for most researchers to not directly interact with LGBT communities and instead rely on non-targeted large populations studies as they would need several hundred thousand completed surveys to have any chance of identifying meaningful trends in the data (hence the American National Crime Victimisation study had to pool data from 2 years to get nearly 500,000 random participants in order to achieve the statistical significance and be able to state with confidence that transgender people are more than four times as likely to be victims of violent crimes compared to people who are not transgender.)
There is simply not the money to operate like this easily. So people who complain that a 'non-probability sampling method' is used (again referred to several times on that transgendertrend site) are setting an impossible barrier and ignoring what is actually good information about this issue given the limitations these studies will always face when trying to recruit participants.
Referring to your last point, I have asked for any data at all on the issue.
I will accept data that defines women as 'adult human females according to chromosome' or that has a larger definition that extends to trans women / those that self ID as women. I will accept data that does not define 'women' at all and that may lead to a larger discussion about what that particular study reveals.
Unlike people disputing evidence on trans suicides who put up barrier after barrier after barrier so they can be blind to the evidence, I am phrasing it like this so that you have no barriers at all to the provision of evidence.
But the fact is, no-one as yet on this thread has put down information about any statistically significant studies at all, irrespective of what definition of 'woman' is used, which indicate women have faced increased harm / negative impact as a result of a country introducing gender recognition processes based on the principle of self-determination