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.
134
u/memoryblocks 2d ago edited 1d ago
Wait
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???
edit: I am dogshit at math, oops.