Transwomen are not women - X (XY?)

[Darat]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Darat, can you say what it means to be a woman? To be treated like a woman?

Of course not.

The only time "gender" has any concrete, comprehensible meaning at all is when it is clearly and explicitly a synonym for sex.

Is this a comment about the revised guidelines on charges of "deception as to gender"?

[d4m10n]

More Trans Teens Are Choosing ‘Top Surgery’

Quote:

Dr. Gallagher said she performed top surgeries on about 40 patients a month, and roughly one or two of them are under 18. Younger patients are usually at least 15, though she has operated on one 13-year-old and one 14-year-old, she said, both of whom had extreme distress about their chests.

The surgeon said that most of her patients, teenagers and adults alike, found her on TikTok. Her online presence has drawn sharp criticism from right-wing media, as well as from some parents and doctors who say she uses the platform to market to children.

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/26/h...teenagers.html

ETA: See if you can spot "stay woke" in the article.

Sent from my Vigero ZX using Tapatalk

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Darat

Is this a comment about the revised guidelines on charges of "deception as to gender"?

It's a comment about stop staring at the tree, look at the forest and then start logging. Conflating sex and gender, and equivocating between the two, without clear definitions, makes the whole issue messy in every case.

First, realize there's no definition for gender, and the only time it actually matters is as a synonym for sex. Then you can start clearing away all the extraneous mentions of gender, or replace them with mentions of sex where appropriate. After that things get a lot less messy in all cases.

[Rolfe]

That's how the trans activists got us into this. By taking advantage of a weird habit that sprang up of using the word "gender" instead of "sex". The entire thing has been a bait-and-switch based on that.

[Darat]

Originally Posted by theprestige

It's a comment about stop staring at the tree, look at the forest and then start logging. Conflating sex and gender, and equivocating between the two, without clear definitions, makes the whole issue messy in every case.

First, realize there's no definition for gender, and the only time it actually matters is as a synonym for sex. Then you can start clearing away all the extraneous mentions of gender, or replace them with mentions of sex where appropriate. After that things get a lot less messy in all cases.

There is a definition of gender in the proposed revised guidelines.

[LondonJohn]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

That's how the trans activists got us into this. By taking advantage of a weird habit that sprang up of using the word "gender" instead of "sex". The entire thing has been a bait-and-switch based on that.

Yeah it’s a grand conspiracy of deception and misdirection. Orchestrated by that malevolent band of trans-activists. Whose chief conspirators (or, if you prefer, chief victims LOL) include global mainstream medical science, mainstream clinicians throughout the industrialised world, and virtually every modern liberal democratic government.



Seriously: can’t you see how ludicrous and non-foundational your whole “they’re pulling the wool over our eyes!” nonsense is? (I mean, obviously you can’t, otherwise you wouldn’t be continually trying to push this conspiracy theory….)

[d4m10n]

The Forgotten Lessons of the Recovered Memory Movement

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/27/o...al-health.html

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Darat

There is a definition of gender in the proposed revised guidelines.

Cite?

[shuttlt]

Originally Posted by d4m10n

The Forgotten Lessons of the Recovered Memory Movement

https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/27/o...al-health.html

If there was one thing James Randi stood for, it was trusting experts not to be blinded by group think or perverse incentives.

[Paul2]

Originally Posted by Vixen

Paul2 wrote:



Not only does your conclusion (that which comes after "therefore by extension") not follow from your premise, but you've also got the problems of (1) how to choose which other species or genus from the animal kingdom we should be looking at, and (2) how do we choose which one to model when two or more options might operate in mutually exclusive ways?

"In other words, your post has serious problems.
__________________
It's nice to be nice to the nice.

Aristotle, so far as I know, was the first man to proclaim explicitly that man is a rational animal. His reason for this view was one which does not now seem very impressive: it was, that some people can do sums. - Bertrand Russell" [ends]

I can recommend N Tinbergen's the Study of Instinct. As you probably know, Tinbergen got a Nobel Prize for his work. The rationale for having this on a reading list is that because Psychology by its very nature is the study of human behaviour, before you can go anywhere near 'what makes people tick?', you need to have a firm grasp of where that behaviour arises from, hence the need to study physiology, especially the brain, the ANS, the CNS and all of the various hormones, heredity factors, psychopathology, animal behaviour. Then you can move onto strip out social psychology by looking at different cultures (social anthropology and kinship systems), then there is sociology, economics (transactional psychology) and criminology. You need to root out the artificial from the natural (Nature versus Nurture). So if people are going to affirm that 'biology is destiny' as Darwin states, then it follows that our question needs to be how much of gender ID is biological? Simply looking at genitals (so to speak) doesn't answer the question set.

Apologies for the very late reply, I somehow missed the new continued thread X.

I don’t see what your post above has to do with the issues I raised. ETA: Can you clarify how your post above answers my previous objections?

[Darat]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Cite?

It's in the link that Aber provided that started this thread of discussion. I take it you've not read what I was commenting on?

[Aber]

Originally Posted by Darat

It's in the link that Aber provided that started this thread of discussion. I take it you've not read what I was commenting on?

Not convinced the definition used is very useful

Quote:

The UK Government defines sex as:

• Referring to the biological aspects of an individual as determined by their anatomy, which is produced by their chromosomes, hormones and their interactions
• Generally male or female
• Something that is assigned at birth.

The UK Government defines gender as:

• Social construction relating to behaviours and attributes based on labels of masculinity and femininity; gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself and so the gender category someone identifies with may not match the sex they were assigned at birth.
• Where an individual may see themselves as a man, a woman, as having no gender, or as having a non-binary gender – where people identify as somewhere on a spectrum between man and woman.

However, in everyday use, sex and gender are often used interchangeably.

plus

Quote:

There are a range of gender identities, such as trans man (someone who was assigned female at birth but lives and identifies as male) trans woman (someone who was assigned male at birth but lives and identifies as female), as well as those who do not identify exclusively as male or female (non-binary).

“Trans” is an umbrella term to describe people whose gender is not the same as, or does not sit comfortably with, the sex they were assigned at birth. Trans people may describe themselves using one or more of a wide variety of terms, including (but not limited to) transgender, agender, gender fluid, non-binary and genderqueer.

There are no universally agreed definitions, the use of specific words can be contested,

[theprestige]

Yeah, hinging "deception" on gender, with those definitions, will be messy. Since the prospective partner will be attracted on the basis of perceived sex.

"It was not deception for me to mislead you about my sex, because I truly believed in my gender identity" is a very messy excuse for tricking a gay man into thinking you are another gay man. It's also very messy thinking, to imagine what attracts a gay man to men and not women is their gender, not their sex.

ETA: Haha oh wow. The "plus" section of Aber's post just makes the whole thing disastrously messy. Lives as a female? As in, arouses sexual attraction in straight men and gay women, and engages in anatomically female sexual intercourse? Pull the other one, it's been assigned bells at birth.

[Rolfe]

I wish someone would tell me how one is supposed to "live as a female", because if it doesn't simply mean being alive and being of the female sex, then I've got nothing. Nothing but regressive misogynistic stereotypes that we thought were on their way out in the 1970s.

It's a complete and utter dog's breakfast.

[Aber]

Originally Posted by theprestige

ETA: Haha oh wow. The "plus" section of Aber's post just makes the whole thing disastrously messy.

I didn't include the bit about how gender identity may change over time; or that the CPS focus should be on the suspect.

The challenge for the police under these guidelines in the suspect interviews will be to establish exactly how the suspect identified at various points, before they can consider whether deception has taken place.

[theprestige]

Whereas the way I see it, the only way to not be intentionally deceiving someone about being the opposite of your real sex is if you're actually insane.

[d4m10n]

From the guidlelines:

Quote:

Deception as to gender may be relevant to the issue of whether consent to sexual activity was vitiated.

Quote:

gender identity is a personal, internal perception of oneself...

Does this imply that you have to disclose your inmost internal perception of oneself in order to obtain informed consent?

Damn, bro; I don't even think I did that to get married.

[Rolfe]

Originally Posted by theprestige

Whereas the way I see it, the only way to not be intentionally deceiving someone about being the opposite of your real sex is if you're actually insane.

It's astounding what can happen. There was a case here not that long ago where a woman was in love with her best friend, who wasn't interested in a lesbian relationship. Somehow the woman managed to pull some sort of Cupid and Psyche act and convince her friend she was a male lover, using some sort of dildo I think, and insisting on a blindfold and silence. (Forgive me if my recollection isn't entirely perfect on this.) Nobody was trans, this wasn't a trans issue, but it does illustrate how improbably possible it is for even a physically normal woman to achieve this sort of deception.

The only way not to be guilty of deception is not to deceive. This proposal seems hell-bent on facilitating deception.

The underlying concern is that when someone decides to transition his or her dating pool shrinks enormously. Hordes of people who are entirely sympathetic to and supportive of trans people in normal life wouldn't contemplate having a romantic relationship or sex with someone who is trans. Well, sorry, that's one of the downsides of deciding to transition. Don't demand that people who wouldn't have sex with you if they knew the truth should consider you as a partner because they don't know the truth. Don't demand immunity from the normal consequences of a deceived partner finding out the truth.

Transwomen who pick up straight men better be especially careful. When digging down into the statistics of all these trans murders we're always being told to have days of remembrance for (hands off my birthday, liars), the very few cases where someone has actually been murdered because they are trans are nearly all transwomen who were murdered by an enraged sexual partner who was outraged at having been tricked into what he saw as homosexual sex. Mostly in Brazil and involving transwomen working as prostitutes, but it could happen anywhere.

[theprestige]

Another clue as to the transsexuality of all of this is the implication that the more completely and successfully you express your transgender identity, the more likely you are to start coding as the opposite sex. I suppose you could argue in court that you sincerely believe you're a woman, and that coding as female was an accidental side effect.

---

Another, much more obvious clue is the whole business of surgery. I know I don't have to explain why.

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

...the very few cases where someone has actually been murdered because they are trans are nearly all transwomen who were murdered by an enraged sexual partner who was outraged at having been tricked into what he saw as homosexual sex. Mostly in Brazil and involving transwomen working as prostitutes, but it could happen anywhere.

Can you please show some evidence to back that extraordinary claim up?

[Rolfe]

Well, if someone ever found more than one or two cases in the world where someone was murdered because they were trans (as opposed to simply being a murder victim who happened to be trans, with some other motive for the murder) then maybe things would become clearer.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Can you please show some evidence to back that extraordinary claim up?

I looked into this in a desultory fashion a few weeks ago. Apparently the claim is that a statistic commonly cited by TRAs as a talking point about the higher risk of violence faced by trans folks was a statistic about a very narrow study of trans sex workers in Brazil, and that it may not say what the TRAs say it says.

[Rolfe]

I have come across a couple of cases outside South America where it might plausibly be held that the motive for the murder was the fact that the victim was trans, but that's about it. The "trans murders" everyone is supposed to have moments of remembrance for on my birthday are overwhelmingly the murders of sex workers in Brazil. There haven't been any trans murder victims in Britain since 2018, and only a handful before that. In contrast, one woman is murdered every week or two. But it's the "trans day of remembrance" that gets the spotlight.

When you look at the individual cases of trans murder victims worldwide excluding South America it is extremely difficult to find a case where someone was murdered "for being trans". The actual crime statistics in Britain show that men are the demographic most likely to be murdered (on a per capita basis), then women, then trans people. The safest thing a man can do, statistically, if he wants to reduce his chance of being murdered, is to transition.

But one can definitely see the scenario. Punter goes with alluring prostitute, look at these long legs, these slim hips, what a stunner. Realises at some point this is a man. Punter is a homophobe who is outraged that he has been tricked into homosexual sex. Punter pulls a knife...

Could happen anywhere, but it seems to be Brazil it happens in.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

But one can definitely see the scenario. Punter goes with alluring prostitute, look at these long legs, these slim hips, what a stunner. Realises at some point this is a man. Punter is a homophobe who is outraged that he has been tricked into homosexual sex. Punter pulls a knife...

If we're rethinking the conventional wisdom on transphobia, maybe it's time to rethink homophobia as well.

A heterosexual man doesn't have to be a homophobe, to be outraged by an unexpected dick in his face. That's sexual harassment, which is legitimately outrageous even when the victim is otherwise attracted to dicks. An unexpected dick in the hand is sexual assault, something that for many people would tend to excuse or at least explain a violent response in the moment.

I can see the scenario, but I can't see tarring the victim as a homophobe just because they react violently when dick is forced on them. I'm sure there are many many gay men who would react much the same way if confronted by nonconsensual dick.

[Rolfe]

OK, I accept your correction. I was thinking that someone who would go so far as violence and murder in that situation would probably have a very low opinion of homosexual men, but you have made a good point.

(It may very well not be that the transwoman in question had a dick. Who knows the exact specifics of what can transpire in these situations. I would imagine that realising you'd just had sex with a surgically-created cavity in the pelvis of a man might be very disconcerting to some men.)

[Dismember]

Originally Posted by theprestige

If we're rethinking the conventional wisdom on transphobia, maybe it's time to rethink homophobia as well.

A heterosexual man doesn't have to be a homophobe, to be outraged by an unexpected dick in his face. That's sexual harassment, which is legitimately outrageous even when the victim is otherwise attracted to dicks. An unexpected dick in the hand is sexual assault, something that for many people would tend to excuse or at least explain a violent response in the moment.

I can see the scenario, but I can't see tarring the victim as a homophobe just because they react violently when dick is forced on them. I'm sure there are many many gay men who would react much the same way if confronted by nonconsensual dick.

Outraged or legitimately surprised/panicked, in a “fight-or-flight” sense.

Finding that a partner is significantly different than expected, and discovering this during an intimate encounter, would be quite a shock. As a woman, my first instinct would be flight, and the “fight” would only be a secondary impulse if I had no escape route. But men, being as (or more) likely to impulsively “fight” when confronted with a potential threat… I can see how it might end in murder.

[Rolfe]

As a woman, while I might be furious that I'd been tricked by another woman, I wouldn't be utterly disgusted to the point of murder, it would be more what the hell do you think you're playing at? I mean my attitude to lesbians is, you go girl, I just fail to see the sport in it. So I was thinking there must be more to it to get a man to the point of murder, maybe a deep disgust of homosexuality. But right enough, men are more likely to react violently when surprised and threatened.

[theprestige]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

As a woman, while I might be furious that I'd been tricked by another woman, I wouldn't be utterly disgusted to the point of murder, it would be more what the hell do you think you're playing at? I mean my attitude to lesbians is, you go girl, I just fail to see the sport in it. So I was thinking there must be more to it to get a man to the point of murder, maybe a deep disgust of homosexuality. But right enough, men are more likely to react violently when surprised and threatened.

Sexual assault.

[Rolfe]

Oh sure. But I wouldn't get murderous. Outraged and maybe call the cops, but not murderous.

[Dismember]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

As a woman, while I might be furious that I'd been tricked by another woman, I wouldn't be utterly disgusted to the point of murder, it would be more what the hell do you think you're playing at? I mean my attitude to lesbians is, you go girl, I just fail to see the sport in it. So I was thinking there must be more to it to get a man to the point of murder, maybe a deep disgust of homosexuality. But right enough, men are more likely to react violently when surprised and threatened.

You’re right, I wouldn’t necessarily feel fear if I thought I was with a man who turned out to be a woman. Probably startled at first and then anger at the deception. I guess I was thinking more from the perspective of the men in Brazil; thinking I was on a date with another woman only to discover, during an intimate encounter, or otherwise in very close proximity, that my date was a man. I’d be alarmed by that revelation in that context.

[Rolfe]

I'm also not sure if I'd call the cops, given the sort of ordeal rape victims are put through. But somebody did, because there was a conviction for exactly that.

It's an entirely different situation though. I'll withdraw my suggestion that any man who murders a prostitute because he discovers that the "woman" he thought he was with was actually a man must be homophobic though. I don't know enough to tell. The fact is that that is the scenario with the vast majority of trans murders where the motive for the murder was the fact that the victim was trans - transphobia if you like. Most murders of trans people (and apart from that specific scenario there aren't many) are just murders, for the usual reasons. Domestic disputes, drug dealing, gang conflicts and so on.

The trans-allies' repeated assertion that trans people are being killed in large numbers because of a wave of transphobia fomented by "terfs" is so much nonsense. It isn't happening.

(This is the Schrodinger's killing spree, where simultaneously trans people are being killed by transphobes at a horrifying rate, and the reason why the number of trans-identifying people is skyrocketing is that these are people who would have stayed in the closet in previous generations who now feel safe to come out.)

Nearly all the murders of trans people - irrespective of motive - that have been solved have proved to be carried out by men. But still it's the fault of these evil terf witches...

[The Atheist]

Originally Posted by Rolfe

Well, if someone ever found more than one or two cases in the world where someone was murdered because they were trans (as opposed to simply being a murder victim who happened to be trans, with some other motive for the murder) then maybe things would become clearer.

That's a very roundabout way of saying "I have no evidence".

Colour me not even slightly surprised.

[Rolfe]

I have no evidence* of trans people being murdered simply on account of their being trans, other than the cases in Brazil where prostitutes have been murdered by angry clients who discovered that the "woman" they thought they were with was actually a man.

Happy now? You're asking me to prove a negative, you realise?

If you have evidence of an epidemic of trans people being set on and murdered simply because the assailant doesn't like trans people, you're free to post it.

* I remember one case, I think in the Netherlands, because it was going the rounds last year when people asked, what trans murders are we actually remembering? It was several years ago. Not sure if there are more, I imagine that's probably not the only one, but I haven't been made aware of any others.

[Aber]

Originally Posted by The Atheist

Can you please show some evidence to back that extraordinary claim up?

Forbes reporting

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewa...h=3dba7694321c

70% of the total were in Central and South America
58% of the total were sex workers

Numbers are skewed; arguments as to causation welcome.

[Rolfe]

Interestingly the statistics from Britain show that there are significantly more murders committed by trans-identifying people than murders of trans people (for whatever reason).

Given the number of extremely unsavoury characters currently in prison for sex crimes who identify as transwomen, many of them actually imprisoned with vunerable female prisoners who can't get away from them, maybe that shouldn't be much of a surprise.

[Dismember]

On the trans murder epidemic:

This 2018 article includes some compelling information which strongly suggests the epidemic we keep hearing about of trans people being murdered isn’t happening, at least not in the way it’s being reported in major media outlets or by trans activists.

The author goes into further detail beyond this brief excerpt, and they include a lot of their sources in embedded links. If you’re skeptical of the statistics, the author credits and/or links to the original sources so anyone who cares to can go through and look for themselves, and see if they might have made some errors. That’s outside my meager skillset.

This section on murder statistics can be found by scrolling down approximately 1/4 of the way through the piece.

Originally Posted by author

Suspiciously, the article chooses to cherry-pick its statistics. Despite the 2014 and 2015 reports from Funders For LGBTQ Issues being available, which show dramatic increases in transgender funding, Buzzfeed cites the reports that date from 2011 through to 2013. Cherrypicked statistics are very much a repeating pattern when it comes to transgenderism. The article tells us that transgender people “have been used as scapegoats” by “conservatives” who oppose “LGBT non-discrimination laws” and bring up the dreaded “men in women’s bathrooms”. It tells us that this is happening while “homicides of transgender women in the US have doubled in the past 12 months”.

Doubled? What did it double from? I decided to verify this, and GLAAD (remember an acronym now devoid of meaning) gave me the answers. So, how many homicides of American transgender people were there in 2016? I am sure you are waiting with bated breath for some kind of titanic, earth shattering number that will have you click ‘exit tab’, and bitch about my ******** article on Twitter. Okay, here it is:

27.

That’s not a typo. It really is 27. The number of total murders in the US in 2016? 17,250, and disproportionately trending black and male. 27 is 0.15% of murders in the US. In terms of figures, the Williams Foundation did a survey and estimated the number of trans people at 0.6% of the US population. The US population is estimated at 325 million at time of writing, which results in a figure of 1.95 million trans people across America.

We’ll take 1.95 million Americans. If we figure how many trans people are victims of murder a year as a percentage, that figure is 0.0013%. Per capita, that’s a ratio of 1.3 trans people murdered per 100,000. The murder rate of women in the US is triple that, and of men, quadruple. Even with an extremely conservative estimate of 0.1% of the US population (or 325,000 trans people), we have a murder rate of 8.3 per 100,000. The murder rate of Chicago is twice that conservative figure at 16.02 people murdered per 100,000. In terms of gross numbers — that’s 11,535 murders of male Americans, and 3,292 murders of female Americans in 2017. 27 is small potatoes. That is not a murder epidemic — in fact it’s a murder rate per capita lower than Canada. It certainly doesn’t mean that there’s an ‘epidemic of transphobic violence’. That’s not something to campaign about — you’ve got it better than literally everyone else. Even if we use the Human Rights Campaign estimate of 750,000 trans people, which is half the 0.6% number, we get a murder rate of 2.7 per 100,000. That’s not a high murder rate. That’s lower than every other demographic in the US.
There are more bad statistics though. That same article tells us that “globally 1,700 transgender murders have been reported, in the past seven years, according to Arcus data” [emphasis mine].

Your eyes immediately drift to the ‘1,700’ figure, and don’t see the 7 years, do they? That’s why I bolded it. If we take the 0.6% estimate of trans people in the US and apply it globally to a population of 7 billion people, we get 42 million people. 1,700 divided by seven years gives us a grand total of 242 murders a year. That amounts to 0.003 murders per capita of trans people, worldwide, every year. That’s definitely not an epidemic. In fact, that’s a global murder rate lower than every other category on earth. The murder rate per capita of unicycle-riding clowns is probably higher. To #StopTransMurders would be to eliminate the homicide of an entire group of people, which no nation has been able to accomplish. Ever.

[Rolfe]

That's an interesting article, thanks. Using US statistics gives a better idea of what's going on, because the higher population gives better significance. The trouble with using British figures is that at the last count there hasn't been a single trans person murdered in the past four years, and that's not a drop-off from previously higher incidence either, these cases are sporadic and unusual.

And did you notice what wasn't touched on by the article? The motives for these murders of trans people. If trans people are being murdered at a significantly lower rate than the rest of the population - and they are - then it doesn't take a genius to work out that this narrative of people being murdered because they are trans is nonsense. Trans people get murdered for much the same reasons other people get murdered. Domestic dispute, involvement in criminal activity such as drug dealing, gang fights and so on. So if they're falling victim overall at a lower rate than the rest of the population, where is the room in the statistics for all these transphobia-fuelled killings?

They aren't happening, that's what.

We're being fed a narrative of the vulnerable, oppressed trans person who is being assaulted and killed simply because of his trans status, by transphobes. And then women who point out that "trans rights" are destroying women's rights are blamed for this. (There aren't many trans murders overall, as we've seen, but the murderers are virtually always men. As are the vast majority of murderers.)

Maybe they should look at the statistics on the number of murders - and sexual assaults - committed by trans people, and start thinking about how to address the disproportionality there. Might be a more useful exercise. But hey, even mentioning that is transphobic hate speech apparently.

It's the same for the Mermaids scenario. Would you rather have a living daughter or a dead son? The implication being that a child who questions his (or her) sex and who isn't immediately indulged with "that's so brave of you darling, we'll get you puberty blockers right away" will almost always commit suicide. There's so much wrong with this it's hard to know where to start.

First, suicide in children is, thankfully, extremely rare. The number of trans-identifying children who have seriously attempted or committed suicide is minuscule. (The figure are derived by asking children if they've thought about suicide. I challenge you to find a single human being who can truthfully state that they've never thought about suicide, at least in the abstract. The figures are also inflated because children presenting as trans are being coached and are coaching each other to use the threat of suicide in order to get what they want.) Figures for actual suicide attempts show a different story.

Any suicidal feelings or attempts, particularly in children, are however a serious matter. And in no other context is the solution simply to give in to the child and grant them whatever it is they're agitating for. Sensitive, probing mental health intervention is what's required. Not drugs that will sterilise the children, prevent their brains maturing, and wreck their bones. Or binders that will permanently damage their breasts.

And thirdly, such studies as have been done show that actually giving in to the children and providing the puberty blockers and the binders and falling in line with the pronoun demands does not improve mental health anyway.

We are being fed a pack of lies regarding both murder and suicide of trans people. Any death is a tragedy, obviously, but trans people are being murdered at a lower rate than anyone else, and committing suicide at around the same rate as people with other significant mental health issues. All these tweets about "how many more of my trans siblings have to die before anyone will do anything?!" are either misinformed (and have taken no trouble to check their information) or are flat out lying.

ETA: When you look at the tenor of the tweets from trans activists to women trying to defend women's rights against the onslaught of trans ideology, much of it is absolutely unhinged. Literally blaming middle-aged women holding meetings and standing around with placards for an epidemic of murder and suicide that isn't actually happening. There really are serious mental health issues there.

[theprestige]

Hypothesis: A trans person who stays closeted in an anti-LGBT community, then moves to a pro-LGBT community and comes out, is less likely to be attacked for being trans.

As LGBT identities (appear to) become more normalized and accepted throughout society, a trans person may decide it is safe to come out in an anti-LGBT community, rather than staying closeted until they can move to a safer place. If they misjudge local sentiment, they may be more likely to be attacked for being trans. Maybe much more likely.

By this process, the number of people being murdered for being trans may be going up, even though it is still very low and even though trans people are still underrepresented as a population.

I think if this hypothesis is correct, we should expect to see that anti-trans murders generally happen in anti-LGBT communities. We should also expect to see that the recent increase in anti-trans murders is happening almost entirely in anti-LGBT communities.

To pick two stereotypes out of a hat, rural Texas versus downtown San Francisco.

---

On the other hand, if murder rate goes up with population density, and it turns out that most trans murder victims are in places where trans population is higher because pro-LGBT sentiment is higher, then anti-trans murders probably aren't a thing.

[Puppycow]

Originally Posted by Aber

Forbes reporting

https://www.forbes.com/sites/jamiewa...h=3dba7694321c

70% of the total were in Central and South America
58% of the total were sex workers

Numbers are skewed; arguments as to causation welcome.

Quote:

375 transgender people were killed this year (2021), a figure that has risen since last year's total of 350.

The report authors say this makes 2021 the 'deadliest year' of violence against gender diverse people since records began. One in four of those murdered were killed in their own home.
. . .

The majority of the murders happened in Central and South America (70%). But like last few years, the most deaths in a single country occurred in Brazil, totalling 33% of global deaths.

375 transgender people in the whole world, 33% of those in one country: Brazil. So about 125 in Brazil.

In total there were 41,100 homicides in Brazil; 125 is 0.3% of the total. A recent study published in Nature estimated that transgender persons were 0.69% of the population (not including non-binary persons). So even in Brazil, it would appear that the rate of homicide for transgender persons is only less than half that of the general population.

On the other hand, the Forbes article also suggests that reported numbers are incomplete.

Quote:

Many hate crimes and murders go unreported or, crucially, misreported in the media – meaning the actual number of deaths could be far higher.

Could be, but no hard evidence that they actually are (relative to the general population). Even if half go unreported, it would simply mean that the rate is the same as it is for the general population.

I checked out of curiosity and 318 people were killed in Japan in 2020. The most recent example I could find of a transgender person being murdered in Japan happened in 2015. Very bizarre case, in fact. A story from the following year reported that police ultimately determined that it was a suicide (OD on sleeping pills) and that the victim's pet chihuahuas had chewed his face off. It was initially reported by The Advocate as a brutal murder and they took the Japan Times and Japanese press to task for "misgendering" the victim's adopted "daughter" (the two were apparently in a sexual relationship.

If they ever issued a correction, I don't see it. A later story in the same publication also referred to the incident as a "brutal murder".

So the mostly widely reported recent case in Japan turned out to be not a murder at all, but much was made of it by The Advocate before the actual facts were known.

[Rolfe]

So, trans people seem to be victims of murder, at the most, at the same rate as the general population (and probably at a lower rate). When asked to come up with specific cases where the motivation for the murder was hatred of trans people, crickets.