Just despair - HOW do some women just not get it!

[Mynewchairhasarmrests]

Just finished a brilliant novel written by a female author about friendships, girlhoo, womanhood, and growing up as a girl. She was so absolutely on the money about what it’s like to be a young woman and the pressures of looking and acting a certain way, the awful way women are so often treated by men, the way women are portrayed in the media, how we are programmed not to recognise sexual assault and told its just boys having fun, and how we aren’t believed even if we do report it. Her anger and passion really came through and it was good, though depressing, to read someone telling it exactly like it is.

You know what’s coming. I then look on her social media. She’s a TRA. Signed a letter condemning JKR for being ‘anti trans’. Condemns Germaine Greer for being so wrong on trans issues.

I just don’t understand how these women can see the misogyny everywhere they look BUT the place where it’s in its worst, purest form - gender ideology.

Its like a glitch in the coding somewhere. Why can’t they see it? I have another friend who is on the board of a rape charity. We had long conversations about how shit it can be to be a woman. The misogyny everywhere. I was sure she must be GC. But no. A TRA. Doesn’t speak to me now she knows I’m a TERF.

I just don’t get it. Is it fear of societal disapproval? A reluctance to admit the liberal progressive cause they publicly embraced is anything but and that they’ve been had?

Sorry but that is very weak. And there’s no way of know if it is actually more or less.

I explained that "less" means men keeping their identity as a woman secret.

So what do you think MORE means?

More sex offenders identifying as women? Can you tell us what you think more means?

A % of one unknown number compared to a % of another completely different unknown number cannot be directly compared.*

It's not that though is it?

It's 40% of men who identify as trans and are sex offenders are compared with men who don't and are sex offenders which is 19%.

If more of the 19 percent should be added to the 40 is it getting better or worse?

This is an inappropriate personal attack. People are not inevitably playing games just because they disagree with you or find your views abhorrent.

Not... Not a change of subject into what FWR posters are like instead of answering an extremely straightforward question?

But that never happens! It never happens so much it's almost become my catchphrase?!

@Scyla
I’m quick to disparage by saying something at 5pm, a full 7hrs after the first insult levied at people like me? Lol

LaughingPriest · Today 10:03
I've wondered this over the years and after thoughtful consideration, my analysis is they're either lying or thick.

Oh and there’s pages and pages for hours and hours of more of this sort before I give one little blip of disparagement.

Well, the thread is full of them
LaughingPriest · Today 10:03
I've wondered this over the years and after thoughtful consideration, my analysis is they're either lying or thick.

Well it's useful for people to see how much flailing goes on.

You need to take responsibility for your own actions. Call put others if you feel offended but don't use it as justification to behave badly.

That's not a personal attack. It's not directed at anyone personally.

If you choose to take it personally, that's on you. Doesn't give you the right to make personal attacks on others.

@Scyla
It is that.
“It's 40% of men who identify as trans and are sex offenders are compared with men who don't and are sex offenders which is 19%.”

You’ve got the categories mixed up your statement should have read
It's 41% of prisoners who identify as trans and are sex offenders are compared with all prisoners who are sex offenders which is 19%.

x= trans identifying sex offenders (could be male or female)
y= all sex offenders in prison population (could be male or female or trans)

both x and y are unknowns and x cannot be determined per MoJ BBC article that your friends have linked to but obviously didn’t understand what it meant.

Of you don’t know x then how could the authors have calculated the 41% in the first case?

Ah.... Did you just glance at the date ranges and make that statement? Because that would be again misrepresenting the data that she uses.

Or did you go and look at the conclusions she has drawn and from the data?

Could you be specific in what you are referring to when you say "wildly different date ranges"?

How about you actually engage rather than attempt a breezy hand wave away.

For example: The statistics on the Fact sheet page are drawn from June 2021 data. Which ones are you disputing?

Are you disputing these FOI request answers?

www.sexsegregatedprisons.info/fois

The ones that say that in the March/April 2021 data collection period, the MoJ stated that of the 97 transgender prisoners with one or more sexual offences.

The breakdown was
40 rapes,
8 attempted rapes,
31 possessing or making indecent photographs or pseudo photographs of child,
32 Sexual assault or attempted sexual assault,
20 causing or inciting a child under 16 to engage in sexual activity,
10 indecent assault or gross indecency
9 sexual activity with a child under 16
27 other

The 97sex offender transgender prisons collected 177 sentences between them.

And that according to that FOI 197 prisoners are transgender.

You got it! Yay, my example was an illustration of why the figures do not say what everyone is thinking they say. Their mistake is apples to pears. That’s why I wrote FALSE in front of conclusion.

So was this
BernardBlacksMolluscs · Today 15:54
Pigeon chess time

any amount of semantics to avoid examining the basis of their beliefs

And this
hamstersarse · Today 16:05
Ironically, I always think it is the programming they have had to 'be nice'

It does seem terribly nasty not to be compassionate to someone when they seem in some sort of psychotic episode

And this
You sound transphobic @Onnabugeisha

To be fair I lose my patience when people are being wilfully dishonest

others are more patient than me

And this
Scyla · Today 15:58
Fascinating how much effort Onnabugeisha is putting into trying to rubbish that data. As if we have all sat around looking at it for a year waiting for someone to explain it to us.

Allies that pop up here are without any doubt the most patronising people that post on Mumsnet.

Again.

Please post the stats you dispute.

Please stop quoting me when attempting to justify what I saw as your personal attack. I am not finding your extracts convincing though I accept that people will draw their own conclusions. Moreover though, I do not believe it is relevant. Your statement is judged on its own merit or unmerit. You feeling affronted by others does not give you carte blanche.

Your comment to me was as well
beastlyslumber · Today 16:00
Is this you being transphobic?

And this one too @beastlyslumber
beastlyslumber · Today 16:05
Because it sounds pretty fucking transphobic to me.

Another personal attack on me
BernardBlacksMolluscs · Today 16:20
Do you think this person knows they are saying things that aren’t true and doesn’t care?

discussing your beliefs seems to make you feel paranoid and attacked @Onnabugeisha

You also struggle to engage in any meaningful way with questions

So you have carte blanche and I do not? Hypocrite.

y= all sex offenders in prison population (could be male or female or trans)

I've not checked what exactly the population they were looking at was, but I know it doesn't matter.

The total prison population is 95% male and not trans-identified, so whether or not the figure is male-only, or includes females and/or trans doesn't significantly affect anything. The difference between taking males only and taking all can't shift the 19% figure by more than one percentage point either way.

Total opposite of looking at the tiny female population (or indeed trans population) where not many people added could cause a huge shift. Which is why it's plausible that the 40% figure for "trans" could be the result of inflation from a relatively small number of "trans for prison purposes" sex offending men, rather than something inherent about the wider "trans" population.

to be fair (to me), you have been saying things that aren't true

do you know and not care, or are you ill informed?