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?

You are the one wilfully misleading yourself and others regarding the sex in the census question

Finally an explanation!

Huh, she should know better than to have wildly different date ranges then as that’s a big nope for valid statistical comparisons.

And there is the garbage in, garbage out problem with the fact that MoJ isn’t entirely sure how many transgender prisoners they have. The BBC article said quite plainly:
”It says the figures "are not yet a reliable reflection of the numbers and location of trans prisoners in the prison estate". The MoJ can't count inmates who have not told prison staff they are transgender. Nor does it count prisoners who have already been given a Gender Recognition Certificate (GRC).”

So if you don’t know how many prisoners are transgender, how can you say 80% of transgender inmates are male or that 99% of transgender sex offenders are male? You literally cannot calculate it with any reliability.

Do you think this person knows they are saying things that aren’t true and doesn’t care?

Yes.

It’s a funny old way to conduct yourself, that’s for sure

I haven't read through all the replies, but I will say that in general I do not think these women are telling lies.

In my experience, most know much less about the "other side" of the argument than women who post here might imagine. And they generally, almost always, think that being trans is a biological thing, like intersex. They tend to believe that what science there is supports that viewpoint. So to them, saying TWAW is not some kind of contradiction, it's giving people their correct designation.

I will also say that sometimes if you dig a bit at the other viewpoints of people who buy into this stuff, they may also be more shallow than you realized, and often they have bought into id pol pretty heavily.

Sorry, but it’s you guys who are being fooled by “damned statistics and lies”

Unless you believe prisoners are being recorded as trans when they are not, the calculated proportion is only ever going to be a minimum, ie an "at least" value.

I’m not referring to that. I am referring to your now deleted post accusing feminists of actively trying to prevent the collection of data about gender

that post was not true

The quote is "there are lies, damned lies, and then there are statistics." But if that's your argument, then why bother even getting into the stats at all? You've also been presented with data and you don't like that either.

@beastlyslumber
It tells us that there are more sex offenders claiming to be trans in prison.

No, it really doesn’t.

Nice of certain posters to give a live demonstration of "not getting it".

It was true, but it’s obviously offended someone so it’s been deleted. Inconvenient truths are often deleted.

The quote is referring to how propagandists manipulate people by misusing statistics or using the wrong data to peddle a narrative. Which you have fallen for because you thought those 40% vs 19% figures actually meant several things they cannot be used to show.

Yes.

Ok

i was talking about this

amp.theguardian.com/society/2022/feb/17/transgender-people-can-self-identify-in-scottish-census-confirms-judge

what were you talking about?

I would be interested in how you think we could measure anything what with your knowledge of prison stats.

What should we be recording against what?

Anyway, OP I too despair some women just do not get it! They really should teach basic statistics and how to spot bad science in secondary school.

Please at least buy this book for your DC
www.amazon.co.uk/Bad-Science-Ben-Goldacre/dp/000728487X

Im off, as it is obviously futile.

Yes, the only way the figures are unclear is that males with a GRC are not being recorded. So the figures in the BBC article are quite likely to be skewed lower than actual figures.

Oh, of course, those cakes won't ice themselves!

Also why would an amazon link have a reference to MN in it?

I can tell from the data that trans-identified prisoners are more likely to be convicted sex offenders than non-trans-identified prisoners. Because the data shows me exactly that. If you can't tell me WHY it doesn't show that and explain what it does show, then why should I believe you over the evidence of data I can see in front of me? You are hardly an unbiased or trustworthy source on this topic.

There can be many reasons why this figure is what it is. But I don't see any reason to not believe the figure itself.

That is a cop out and I think any readers reading along will see it as such.

Up until 31/12/2019 there were 122 females in prison having committed sex offences according to the statistics readily available on line. ( I have not analyses whether that includes prostitution offences by the way) [from Table 1.2b: Prison population under an immediate custodial sentence by offence group, age group and sex]

There was known to be 76 transitioned males in prison in the UK for sex offences. This is data collated by searches from women's groups etc.

By the way, that 122 female number, I have not gone and verified how many of those are even female and how many are males recorded as females. It is not actually necessary for a raw data comparison using common sense.

I don't believe that it takes any further observation unless it is extremely bad faith to ignore this data. It is very very clear to see using raw numbers of females in UK prisons for sexual offences rather than any % analysis about ratio of population etc.

All the twisting in the world cannot ignore that transitioned males do not commit sex offences at a rate any where near the general female population.

That is the important observation.

Transitioned males do not commit sex offences at a rate any where near the general female population.

Please explain why you would ignore the raw number comparison.

Can't tell which sex have a cervix and can't do basic numeracy. I give you tras.