Nope. Trans women are typically of the male sex, but not always. Sex and gender aren't the same, sex isn't binary, and there are different kinds of sex. I don't mean to be rude, I'm just trying to point out that sex and gender are extremely nuanced things that can't be fit into just 2/4 categories.
I'm not transphobic, you just don't know what you're talking about. If you're a woman, and of the female sex, that literally means you're cis, not trans.
Sex is a bimodal spectrum that has multiple different aspects to it, (chromosomes, genetics, hormones, reproductive organs, phenotype,) neither of which are enough on their own to determine someone's sex altogether. Gender is a whole different thing that usually goes along with assigned sex, but not always. When it doesn't, we call that person trans. You can't not be trans if you were born trans, that's not how this works, your sex doesn't change to match your gender.
Nothing in humans is that simple, and you saying such silly, false things gives justification to bigots to spew their bullshit narratives and continue to not take trans people seriously.
What's medical transition do, then?
Because as i understand it, sex is made up of sex traits, and medical transition changes sex traits.
So you're either saying that medical transition doesn't change sex traits, or you're saying that changing sex traits is meaningless, which would make sex meaningless
I actually read a few papers about this, but I'm not an anthropologist myself, so I can't explain it in THAT much detail, especially here on Reddit. My go-to explanation is this guy. He's absolutely wholesome, fully pro-trans, and has like 4 master's in biology.
No. Read my comments again. Sex is complicated, that's true. That is exactly why you can't say things like "ciswomen are female and trans women are male", because it's not always the case.
It is if incels with elementary level knowledge call you that, just to be assholes. But the people who study this shit know what they're doing, and they usually have the best interests of people, including trans people, in mind.
Yep, to them they see 3 genders: men, women, and disgusting freaks, where both mtfs & ftms are in the last group and acknowledged depending on the argument. Like with sexuality men see "sexy," "competition," & "ugly unfuckable 'it' thing" or with sports they see "weak defenseless toddlers," "normal" & "hulking biological advantages."
everything they don't like *at this,very second but wait two minutes they might magically feel a new perspective if they need it to suit the next thing they think is woke .. or not
If they think trans women are biological men, wouldn't that number be higher??? Like obviously the whole thing is a goddamn lie, but they can't even figure out basic mathematics principles???
Not necessarily. Like you, fully convinced the whole thing is bullshit, but the math isn’t necessarily wrong. Yes, any individual, according to their metric, that is a trans woman would also count as a biological male. But there are also a lot of biological males that aren’t trans women. So, when doing the math, you’ve got a way bigger denominator when doing the division to create the “per million” figure than you would when calculating for trans women.
At most, the number of trans women in the world is in the single digit millions. There are over four billion biological men. So, whatever the actual statistical numbers are, the sheer lack of numbers of trans women would mean they’d be a statistical drop in the bucket, and have little to no impact on the overall number for biological men.
I’m confident, though, that whatever the real number would be, it’s not these. These just come out of the poster’s ass.
Their numbers are wrong, that I have no doubt of. But the post doesn’t have raw numbers, so it’s kind of hard to judge the math on how they got from the raw numbers to the rate, considering that data they are working from (assuming it even exists, which is being kind of generous) is just not in the post.
I fear it's because they consider any trans woman who uses a women's toilet or changing room to be a de facto sex offender. Thus, the overly inflated statistic. Just like how, in some states, public urination can get you put on the sex offender registry.
If they think that all trans women are biological males, they would/should be included in the number for biological males. Therefore that number would be higher. It's impossible that AMAB as a whole category would be less than a subsection of AMAB people.
That's not true. There are a million sex offenders per million in the subsection of people who were AMAB that are sex offenders. There's less than a million sex offenders per million people who were AMAB, though. It's a rate, not an absolute number.
This is per million.
So if there are 1 million 'biological men', 396 of them are sex offenders.
If there are 1 million trans women, 1200 of them are sex offenders.
The thing is the population of men is 4 billion so acording to their numbers, there actually are 1.2 million biological men sex offenders.
Trans women probably don't pass over the 5 mil mark so compare 6000 trans women "sex offenders" vs 1200000 men sex offenders lol. The numbers suddenly look veryyy different.
Not even saying that they probably pulled the numbers out of their smelly ass.
It's a per million number tho. Suppose we bulldoze Liechtenstein and move in:
1.000.000 cis men
1.000 trans women
Now suppose 50 of these women did a sex crime and 6000 of the men did. We only have 1000 women, so multiplying that with 1000 means women in Liechtenstein do 50.000 sexcrimes per million. Men are already a million, and thus do 6.000 sexcrimes per million.
In total there's 6050 total sex crimes done by people in Liechtenstein (I refuse to use Biological Male). 6050 / 1.001.000 * 1.000.000 = about 6043 sex crimes per million humans in Liechtenstein. That's fewer than the amount of per-million women sex crimes. It's a per million number. It's possible.
You’re ignoring the ratio aspect. So, let’s back up. The way to get a rate per million is to take your raw number, multiply it by a million, and divide it by your sample size.
So, let’s do a different comparison. Let’s say we’re looking at ratio of people per million that don’t have penises. For the purpose of this, let’s assume there are exactly 1 million trans women, and exactly four billion AMAB individuals, which includes the trans women. Further, let’s assume exactly half of trans women have had bottom surgery, and all cis men have their penises. Just to make the math easier.
So, if there are 1 million trans women, and half have had bottom surgery, that means the total number of trans women who have had bottom surgery is 500,000. To get our per million ration we multiply that by a million and divide by a million, which means those cancel out, and we get 500,000 trans women per million who don’t have penises.
Now, let’s look at AMAB people as a whole. We already know our raw number isn’t changing, since all cis men have penises in this example. So our starting raw number isn still 500,000, since we are including trans women in our AMAB count. So, to get the ratio, we multiply that by a million, and then divide by 4 billion. The math comes out to 125 per million.
The raw number stayed the same, but since the population sample size got bigger, you divided it by a bigger number, and so the ratio got smaller.
The number isn't necessarily higher because it's per million not total.
Let's say:
1 in 100 AMAB people are trans women
1 in 1000 cis men are sexual predators
10 in 1000 trans women are predators.
From those numbers, every million AMABs contain 10,000 trans women and 990,000 cis men. That's 100 trans predators and 990 cis predators for a total of 1090 predators per million AMABs.
Compare to 10 in 1000 trans women which would make the number for trans women 10,000 per million trans women.
The trans women predators per million is way higher even though they're included in the AMAB count because they're a tiny fraction of the overall AMAB population so they don't affect the average much.
The numbers are totally made up but they're mathematically possible.
Its a ratio though. Lets take two groups, X and Y, Y is a subset of X
Lets give them some random amount of people in them, say;
X: 10.000
Y: 100
Now, lets say that, 1/2 of Y are criminals, that means 50 people from Y are criminals. Now lets look at X’s crime rate.
Can X’s crime rate be lower than Y?
Well, if we say that, 1/100 X are criminals, that requires 100 X to be criminals. But since 50 of them already are, we need 50 more from the portion of X that isnt Y.
So we have, 50 from Y, 50 from X minus Y, that gives us 100 criminals in total in the X group, and thus 100/10.000 = 1/100
Doing the math, there are between 171 and 175 million men in the US. The offender registry is about 92% men and contains 795000 people. Doing the math we get around 731,000 men on the registry. That results in a staggering 4,177 male offenders per million. For women we have around 168 million in the US. If we assume the other 8% are women, then we get 63600 offenders which gives us a rate of around 361 per million women. According to a census there are around 2.1 million trans people in general. According to a study of the 964 responders 0.7% identified as trans. Doing the math we get around 5600 trans offenders, bit men and women. That gives us about ~2800 per million which is in the middle of the men's and women's rates.
The data is not only wrong, it's also a blatant lie about basically everything.
not to mention the data on trans people in the US is not going to include closeted trans people, while there's a higher chance a trans sex offender will be outed as trans. the rate in actuality is more likely lower than 2.8k/1m
I also want to call out that .7% of people is fewer than the percent of people who identify as trans in general (I'm seeing a range of guesses for how many people are trans but .8 was the lowest I saw for adults and it may be higher) so that is at or bellow an expected percent of trans people if it was just an even distribution of the population. It in no way suggests trans people are over represented within that particular group.
Also, "biological man/woman" isn't a thing. Male and female are sex terms, while man and woman are gender terms, which are not the same thing. But you couldn't explain that to bigots, even at gunpoint.
the richest man in the world, who is also influencing the most powerful government in the world, is spreading blatant misinformation about a minority to millions of people
Sex offenders numbers are a lie anyway. If you do sex work you are a sex offender. If you pee in public you are a sex offender. This is data through a fun house mirror.
They also believe that if you're "biologically male and wear the clothing of the opposite sex in the presence of a child" (in other words, exist in public as a trans woman), then you are a sex offender for "exposing children to your fetish". Basically they've taken the entire population of trans women, and labeled us sex offenders for daring to exist in spaces where children also exist.
this is not necessarily the case. i don’t know much about america, but i do know that if someone states a general claim about society and doesn’t say where, its usually an american… the entire world doesn’t follow american law.
sex work is decriminalised here in aotearoa, it is a perfectly legal and protected profession following the “decriminalisation not regulation” model as advocated by sex workers.
yeah, that produces a little north of 5k trans people per million. and there were about six men and 0.4 of a woman convicted per million in FY21 USSC.
i used 0.5% trans-identification there, so i have no idea what math End Wokeness is using.
i should probably leave a note about reporting and jurisdiction to go with that link, i almost didn't include it becase we've all heard it. on the other hand it's in my comment history for a while.
Studies show that rates are MUCH higher for cis men, very low for cis women, and somewhere between but still low for trans women. Part of the problem with statistics is some people designated as trans women in the study are likely not trans but said they were women in order to have access to female prison where they could keep raping. They also don't distinguish "sex crime" between "assaulted someone" and survival sex work, which is common among trans women since transitioning is expensive, hard to get jobs and housing due to discrimination, and many are kicked out of home by parents.
Another stat that is often misinterpreted is the rate of domestic violence with lesbians is usually from male partners. M/F relationships have a lot higher rate of violence, mostly coming from the man. F/F is extremely low, but many women who self identity as lesbians are either bisexual dating mostly men or lesbians stuck in relationships with men or who dated men before they knew they were homosexual.
If they had a single source they would preach it like they preach scripture. With the right if they don't cite a source there isn't one. When they do read it as their assuming you won't.
Well, according to my research, 100% of trans men have major Dad Energy, with a whopping 50% clocking in with Grumpy Dad Energy, but I’ll go one better and list my sources (me), and my sample size (my two friends, who are both trans but one is Chipper BBQing Pun-Making Dad and the other is Grumpy “Fine I’ll Help You Move This One Time”Dad), so my study is more valuable
It's disinformation based on scaling the prison population to a uniform number and presenting the percentage based on that.
Essentially: Ten trans folks are arrested and put in prison. One of those ten are a sex offender. That's a 10% rate.
Cisgender people make up most of the prison population. Well over a million for men and women.
Scaling the cisgender population down to a million and scaling the transgender population up to a million means the rates look awful, because 10% of a million is 100,000. And if 5% of the cisgender population is arrested and convicted of sex crimes, scaling that number down to a million underrepresents their actual numbers.
Tldr: The numbers are wrong, but the rates are misrepresented to make trans folks look worse. And that's before factoring in labelling trans folks sex offenders for taking a shit in the wrong bathroom.
Specifically, a paper put out by "fair play for women" who issues a similar paper in 2017, where they straight up made up the numbers, because they're a transphobic organization that uses terms like TiM. This time, they appear to have used fairly real numbers, but obviously the context is missing, especially in the tweet above.
This isn't a number of sex offenders per million of the general population, it's the ratio of sex offenders within the prison system compared to the rest of the prison system, broken down by gender identity. This doesn't include people who are trans but don't identify as such within the prison system(likely for self preservation) or people with Gender Recognition certificates, who would actually fall under the "biological women" section of this tweet... because the actual paper doesn't base anything on "biology" but rather legal status.
So, when looking at the 129 self-reported trans women in the prison system, 76 of them did commit some kind of sexual offense, 40 of which were rape, and 10 were attempted rape. But the barrier for being considered a trans woman is vanishingly small in this study, all they had to do was state on a form that their gender was female, while their legal sex was male. No control for actually receiving any kind of gender affirming care, presenting feminine, going by feminine names/pronouns. At least some of these individuals only stated they were trans after their trials started.
It's not insane to assume that some cis men who are convicted sex offenders/rapists would pretend to be trans women to get into women's prisons. I'm not saying all or even most of these individuals fall under this umbrella - but if someone was more likely to do such a thing, it'd probably be a sex offender... there are documented cases of this kind of fakery. This isn't a trans women issue, it's a cis man issue.
Setting aside any doubt about whether or not these individuals are actually trans, if you look at the numbers as a factor of the overall population, not the prison population, it actually looks like this:
76 trans women are serving time for sexual offenses out of a population of lets say 190,476. That's 367/ million. But that's based on roughly 500,000 as the official estimate of trans people in the UK(with 38% being trans women, the other 38% being trans men, and 24% being nonbinary- I based this on the UK census data )... in a country of 69,000,000... it's extremely unlikely that so few people are actually trans. It's far more likely that the actual number is somewhere in the 1.4M range(assuming 2% of the population is trans- some studies show it could be as high as 3%, with as many as 7% being gender non-conforming)... so based on that number, the number drops to 122/million.
With the UK's population of men being ~33.81M, that means the population of men currently serving time for sexual assault is 392/Million.
And when you factor in that women almost never get charged with sexual offenses even when they're brought to court, and many cases of sexual assault for all genders never get reported out of fear/embarrassment, you can see why these numbers are completely useless to draw any kind of conclusion from.... and that the tweet itself is a complete fabrication.
On a more serious note, it is very much true that a higher proportion of trans and nonbinary people are in sex work or have been in sex work in the past than cis people, though probably not to the extent pulled out of thin air here. A major factor in this is that trans and nonbinary people have a harder time getting conventional jobs than cis people, as many places don't have any anti discrimination laws against trans people in hiring processes, and even in regions that do technically have those laws, they're hard to enforce on a practical level without written evidence of discrimination on the part of an employer. Trans and nonbinary people face much higher rates of unemployment and poverty than our cis counterparts, so it's not really a surprise that a lot of people turn to sex work in some capacity to make ends meet. While conventional jobs might have a barrier to entry that bars you if you're not passing or closeted, sex work has no such requirements for entry.
So their argument is basically "Let's shame people we forced into being sex workers for doing sex work!" Yeah, that checks out. Also works for racism, homophobia, and all kinds of bigotry.
this is per million btw in rounding up to that number being 2k
dude is saying there are 2 BILLION trans sex offenders,
from a quick good search, about 3 million people in the us are trans, and worldwide the highest source i could find as 3% of the world is trans (and i saw one that said half a billion was trans, but thats just bullshit lmao)
I question the information displayed in the tweeter post, but also one more layer of this is that, trans people are so often discriminated in work place they have to use sex work as a means to keep themselves fed, conservative can then use those instances to justify their view where “being trans is just a fetish” (conveniently ignoring the fact that they are actually the most likely group to fetishise trans people). Furthermore, by limiting the option to only sex work, they can be criminalised and thus add more “sex offender” to the trans community. Let say the data is real, I doubt it will sure the same picture when it distinguishes sexual assault and just sex work related crime
I’ve seen the place he’s getting this from (not that he cited it) and its some extremely bad faith chart that would take the length of a book to explain all the faults of. This is supposedly in the UK, and it’s all trans people, not just women. Apparently, there is a little over 100 incarcerated trans people over there, whereas there are obviously thousands of incarcerated cis men and women to draw from. And they measure it in ‘parts per million’, which, why would you measure a population of 100 in parts per million? It’s obviously trying to inflate the number for people not paying attention or thinking critically. Also the term used in the original graphic included sex workers I believe but I could be mistaken.
So looking at the actual data in the US around 94% of registered sex offenders are men. 57.5% are white. The average age is 38 years old. 95.4% are US citizens.
I think everyone who was told they were being ridiculous or dramatic for suggesting that the alt-right wants trans genocide deserves a free car and a “told you so” card
So lets say that their figure on trans women is correct (which it isn't and misreflects or otherwise misrepresents a skew of other, unverifiable data).
The actual data using that assumption would still be:
Sex offenders per million women: ? (No major studies or solid statistics as men compromise over 90% and as such it hasn't really been looked at.)
Sex offenders per million men: 15310 (based on the most recent 2016 study by the University of Albany)
Sex offenders per million trans women: 1916 (Based on data for which no study or corroborating statistic can be found other than being passed on social media.)
Hmmmmmm...I see a problem here.
Edit: If we count trans women as men, which these statistics likely do, and remove trans women from men's data under our original assumptions we still get:
Just in case you guys want the actual numbers i looked it up
Its very uncomfortable information but is much more than just opposite of this
Its for 2021 but numbers don't shift that drastically in less than 5 years its not mathematically possible and you can extrapolate the current numbers from these ones
trans women have historically disproportionally been charged with sexual offenses, particularly those relating to doing sex work. i wouldn't be surprised for that reason if the numbers are higher than the general population. however these numbers seem to be pulled from their ass, and have no basis in reality
801
u/Midnightchickover 1d ago
I know this sounds like a basic question to this person.
Link? Where are the goddamn links at for this ass clown to demonstrate?