So apparently, using sites like WomenAreHuman and This Never Happens to show how the Trans ideology is harming Women is "Cherry-picking"

submitted by Kai_Decadence from self.GenderCritical

So I'm in the middle of a debate with a guy who heard from others in a Facebook group I used to be in before getting banned for being "transphobic" because someone saw my old posts where I supported JK Rowling back during the Maya Forstater controversy and came out as GC. The guy was asking me why I felt the way I do and I went in explaining the usual stuff like how being a woman is not a feeling or an "identity", that there is no such thing as a "Female Brain", how the trans ideology is hurting women's rights, how this trans ideology is being pushed onto young gender non-conforming children, and how it's even a kind of gay erasure.

But unsurprisingly he said that I was acting paranoid for saying all that stuff. On the female brain thing for example, I pretty much said that how can a "female brain in a man's body" be a thing when there's no standard to compare the brain to? Like show me a PET scan of 2 standard sexed brains and compare it to a PET brain scan of a trans-identified man's brain but he said that it's not necessary because according to studies, transwomen have the same brain structure as women ergo they have female brains.

And when it came to the whole "It's affecting women's rights" thing, I gave him links to the sites WomenAreHuman, the "This Never Happens" Facebook page, and made mention of "It's a Fetish" but he ended up saying that WomenAreHuman and This Never Happens are irrelevant to the topic because tit's just "selection bias" and "Cherry-Picking". That it's just a small minority of people "who "Aren't really trans anyway" and that those documented articles don't prove anything except bias. But that wasn't the freaking point, we hear all the time that "transwomen don't assault or sexually harass women" and I was simply trying to show that it does happen, that it is a thing but apparently it just wasn't good enough. He then ended saying that he could see why peopel think I'm "Transphobic".

I just cannot.

all 55 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]CJLez 36 insightful - 1 fun36 insightful - 0 fun37 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

For the gay erasure where he says you are paranoid - maybe link him to the stories that the Tavistock whistleblowers said about the homophobic parents wanting their kids 'fixed' and the jokes the employees would make about how there soon won't be any gays/lesbians left in the UK. They have a better insight into what is happening than me or you or he does.

I'd link to the primary news sources linked on the WAH / TNH stories (usually local news websites) rather than those websites directly in future as they are harder to discount as a biased source.

Also, ask him if he believes in self-ID and then, if he says yes, tell him that, by his definition, every one of those people was 'really trans anyway' because they IDed as trans, whether or not they actually suffered from any form of dysphoria. This is a classic No True Scotsman fallacy.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

I don't know if linking to the Tavistock Whistleblowers will help because he also said that I spend too much time on the internet and that I should "live in the real world". I'll still give it a try but he is one of "those" people.

And fair enough, I guess it's better to just link to the individual stories rather than the websites themselves because they're branded as "TERF" sites though I still feel like they will just say "Selection bias" or "Cherry-picking" still.

[–]CleverNickName 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

If a significant number of real healthcare professionals leaving a real clinic in the real world over real concerns isn't "living in the real world", then nothing ever will be.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Very true. And it's because you don't really hear about this stuff in the mainstream media so these people think that it's just a myth or "overblown".

[–]Comatoast 21 insightful - 1 fun21 insightful - 0 fun22 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

I think that there's dismissal here. When I've tried to talk to female family members about any of this, it's dismissed. I think the problem might be that people who aren't affected in a very direct and constant way simply don't give a shit, to a point where they'll refute everything they're told and end it with "mehh, well that's just something on the internet and doesn't really happen that way irl". It's really kind of strange, like an inability to accept anything outside of what's immediately observable in their own space.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 11 insightful - 2 fun11 insightful - 1 fun12 insightful - 2 fun -  (6 children)

Exactly, I think it's harder when it comes from women being so complacent with the way trans ideology is bulldozing over women's spaces like not caring if men use the women's restroom or going to women's shelters. Like I've gotten called a "white knight" a few times form women saying that I'm not gonna get any points to sleep with women by speaking out against trans even though I am clearly a gay man lol

[–]Comatoast 9 insightful - 2 fun9 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Oh no, you won't get to sleep with women now--what a shaaaame for you. Yeah, if they knew you were gay, that's just insulting.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

For real lol

[–]SanityIsGC 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I think people like your family members and that guy need to be confronted with actual photos of men flaunting their "girl dicks" There was one linked to on reddit GC that I can't forget: a shot from the rear, legs spread and his junk hanging. Pure porn. This is stuff their kids are being exposed to if they're curious about what trans means. Ask them if that is harmless? I think the vast majority of people assume most trans people are surgically altered. Ask the guy if that is his idea of a woman.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

LOL Well I actually never thought of using an example like that before. Confronting these people to the full force of AGP and how it can manifest in women's only spaces and just how unsettling it is and yet they expect women to put up with that kind of stuff in their own spaces. I'll definitely give this a try even though I'm sure he's just gonna go with the "That's just a small minority" thing. Have any recommendations where I can find these kinds of pictures. I don't really want to look for porn of it but actual guys flaunting their dicks in a non-porno set if you know what I mean.

[–]Realwoman 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

All I can could find was here:

https://www.womenarehuman.com/male-transgender-boasts-of-harassing-women-in-crisis-shelter/

[–]SanityIsGC 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I did some googling and most images are naked TIMs with erections and big boobs lounging on sofas.I didn't find any photos that weren't pornographic. Non-porn shots of flaccid girl-dicks may be out there but my brief search didn't find any. Even though these porno shots are extremely off-putting and revolting, I think such images should be seen by as many people as possible as they starkly reveal the profoundly disturbed mindset. That said I won't post the link I found with 14 graphic photos unless you ask me to. I idea these represent only a minority is laughable

[–]ladyreason 17 insightful - 1 fun17 insightful - 0 fun18 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

Perhaps point out that each one of these "cherries" are female human beings, sometimes even children, being directly harmed by the ideology he's espousing.

Then ask him if he realizes how misogynist it sounds to refer to hurting human women as pieces of fruit, and ask how many "cherries" it's going to take before he starts caring about them as people. One bushel of female humans? Two?

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

Yeah I already got on him equating women to a feeling and look when he said that "If it looks like a duck, talks like a duck, and quacks like a duck, then it is a duck" as a way to explain why Transwomen are women and I just flat out asked if he realized how sexist he was sounding equating womanhood to femininity while addressing what he thinks about super masculine presenting women like Ivan Coyote and if they're not women by his logic.

But you're so right, referring to these women in the articles as pieces of fruit not worth listening to really does come off very misogynistic. These are HUMAN BEINGS here and they deserve to be taken seriously, especially when these kinds of people say that these assaults "Never happen". And yeah I was actually gonna bring that up about how many women getting assaulted or harassed is it gonna take for people to finally understand where these women are coming from. He's turning them into essentially sacrificial lambs and that is just messed up.

[–]Realwoman 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Transwomen don't look like women, they don't sound like women, they don't talk like women (do women say stuff like "suck my girl dick"?) and they don't act like women. Show your friend this video and ask him if that guy looks anything like a woman

https://youtu.be/NDrhMrqBe48

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

That video was crazy lol But yeah that's exactly the kind of bullshit I'm talking about that but I feel like he would just say that the dude in that video is not really trans because "he's not trying to look like a woman" and then would most likely use someone like Blaire White to get his point across (even though Blaire White doesn't really look like what he does in his videos and is using makeup, lights, and angles to warp his appearance...). I just think he's gonna write that video off because he thinks that being a woman in our culture is about how you look and will then throw me examples of hyper feminine looking men.

[–]Realwoman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Well, that guy identifies as a lesbian. So how are you going to distinguish between "real" transwomen and guys like that? How are you going to stop guys like him from claiming they're women? Ask him for a list or something. Then he'll have to give you examples such as "long hair", "makeup", "clothes" and to each example you can counter - but many biological women have short hair, don't wear makeup and don't dress in a particularly feminine way.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah I'm sure he will resort to the feminine appearance thing. He did mention how Blaire White "puts effort in to look like a woman" so yeah, he's one of "those" people. I'll still send him that video just to see what he says but I won't be surprised if he resorts to "Not trying to look feminine = No trying to be a woman" and I'll go from there.

I actually did try to do what you suggested by saying "If being feminine is what makes someone a woman then what about masculine women like Ivan Coyote though I don't think he addressed it. He just said that IF a masculine woman feels like a woman, then she is a woman. "FEELS" I asked him "How do you feel like a woman?" but he didn't answer and brought up the culture angle saying that in our culture, we operate on looks and then used the duck analogy.

[–]Realwoman 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

So he's contradicting himself, first it's about how you feel, then it's about how you look. He just changes the argument as it suits him.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I realize that he did that now that I reflected and it feels like it doesn't matter what I say at this point.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right, I'm still waiting on his response and I'll hone in on the whole appearance thing again.

[–]marmalade 12 insightful - 4 fun12 insightful - 3 fun13 insightful - 4 fun -  (1 child)

He is a man, his opinion is invalid, full stop.

If trans people were honest with their intentions, he wouldn't be able to claim that.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 9 insightful - 1 fun9 insightful - 0 fun10 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah I had a feeling he would just not grasp it because he's not a woman. I mean I'm not a woman neither but it's easy to see how this trans stuff is just based in fantasy and pseudo science. And especially how it's affecting women in a negative way.

[–]GConly 13 insightful - 1 fun13 insightful - 0 fun14 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

but he said that it's not necessary because according to studies, transwomen have the same brain structure as women ergo they have female brains.

He's wrong. The only difference they ever picked up was down to homosexual orientation in the childhood GD group. They have normally sex developed brains for their sex and sexual orientation.

You're kind of wrong about not being able to tell sexes apart with an MRI scan though. You can do it in about 95% of cases, and where you can't it's usually because the person is gay and got an atypical hormone exposure in the womb.

The heterosexual TIMs have typical guy brains.

Show him these.

New MRI Studies Support the Blanchard Typology of Male-to-Female Transsexualism

If there is any neuroanatomic intersexuality, it is in the homosexual group. In heterosexual male-to-female transsexuals, the difference may not involve sex-dimorphic structures at all, and the nature of the structural difference is not necessarily along the male–female dimension.

Contrary to the primary hypothesis, no sex-atypical features with signs of ‘feminization’ were detected in the transsexual group….The present study does not support the dogma that [male-to-female transsexuals] have atypical sex dimorphism in the brain” although that statement should have been restricted to refer to heterosexual male-to-female transsexuals only.

Structural connections in the brain in relation to gender identity and sexual orientation

These are the studies that TIM supermod on Reddit removes as soon as he sees them, so you know they can't be argued away.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (2 children)

Yeah I did try pointing him to Ray Blanchard's studies on the HSTS vs Straight trans-identified men but he shot it down saying that it's all anecdotal and "bias".

You're kind of wrong about not being able to tell sexes apart with an MRI scan though. You can do it in about 95% of cases, and where you can't it's usually because the person is gay and got an atypical hormone exposure in the womb.

Well the thing I was arguing wiith him about is that there's no standard to compare the brain to. Even if we homosexual males do share similar brain structures to that of females, I was just trying to explain to him that if the brain sex theory was true, wouldn't it make more sense to have trans-identified people take mandatory brain scans to make sure they are making a informed decision before they "transition"?

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3180619/

Yeah I actually just got through reading that and I'll send that to him if responds back as well as the other one. But I remember showing him this site for reference

https://www.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468?fbclid=IwAR3SluVjPC6mbqu0fU7km0E_QmSYe0r5-7axHEC4P4_4tbZnu2h-tiqmcok

And he responded with this lol

"Look at the letters that https://www.pnas.org/content/112/50/15468 generated (available in that same web page) and you will see that the question of "brain sex" seems to be far from settled."

And I mean of course it's not "settled", people have been trying to find the female brain for a long time and the closest thing they found was some slight similarity when it comes to Homosexual brains but that doesn't make us homosexuals trapped in the wrong body or some nonsense like that.

And when I tried to use the "I think therefor I am" analogy by saying that if men can be women just because they think they are women then Rachel Dolezal is a black woman because she feels like she is one and that Nato lady from Norway is a cat because she thinks she's a cat, he pretty much said that because race is a social construct, that means that Rachel can definitely be a black woman and that there's nothing wrong wit ha person transitioning from white to black or vice versa ( you just can't make this stuff up). Right before he said that me mentioning WomenAreHuman lowers my credibility even more.

[–]our_team_is_winning 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

wouldn't it make more sense to have trans-identified people take mandatory brain scans to make sure they are making a informed decision before they "transition"?

I do love the idea of them having their heads examined. They have zero "proof" of being women other than "I feel like a woman" -- he should just feel like a fool, I'm afraid.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly, they have no solid evidence and they know it. That's why they don't make brain scans a mandatory thing which in the grand scheme is ridiculous because "Transitioning" does damage the body and can lead to serious health side effects so you'd think that they'd want to make sure the person is making an informed decision before doing it but you know, can't stop the gravy train flow.

[–]IStandWithHer 10 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 1 fun11 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I think it's telling enough that he thinks that even one rape, one harassment, one incident with a TiM that is a direct consequence of self-ID laws and trans lobby liberally interpreting the existing laws is just a "casualty" (and we know it's sadly much more than just "one" such case). He doesn't care about women. So don't care about him. Just remember that when the medical scandal erupts, he will be one of the "shocked and appalled" who couldn't have possibly known. Bullshitters, all of them.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Right I just sent him one more reply and depending what he says after when he gets back to me, I'm done. I cannot bother with people like this who will not even try to engage in critical thought and actually put themselves in the shoes of women who are talking about this as well as the victims only to be written off as "casualties" or essentially saying what happens to these victims is not a big deal. Like seriously, these people.

[–]jet199 8 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 0 fun9 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

He's having fun and you aren't so just dump the info and get out.

Here's the thing you need to refute the brain scan stuff. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/51477051_New_MRI_Studies_Support_the_Blanchard_Typology_of_Male-to-Female_Transsexualism

Most studies knowingly fudge the data by looking only at HSTS because it's already known homosexual men have some areas of the brain similar to women. But 90% of TiMs are AGP so those results are nowhere near representative of transgender people as a whole.

Also most likely he's been moving the goal posts during the arguement and you have followed his lead rather than refusing to be drawn in. That's why that site's called "this never happens". Likely he said something similar to "it never happens" so you showed him the evidence it does and then he moved the goal posts to "oh, it only rarely happens". Watch out for that.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

Yeah I actually did mention Ray Blanchard's studies and typology to him, even suggesting he give his books a read or watch some of his videos but he just responded with "You're on the internet too much and should live in the real world, I don't need to look at those links because it's all anecdotal - or something like that - ). I'll show him that link you gave but I doubt he'll look at it.

But you're right, he really is moving the goal posts now that I'm reflecting. He said that attacks on women by Transwomen doesn't really happen all that often, I show him WomenAreHuman and This Never Happens, he responds with "I['m not gonna bother reading through those, it's selection bias and cherry-picking. And besides, most of them aren't even "really trans", then he pretty much said that if a man is making himself looking super feminine than that means he's putting the effort into trying to be a woman and he should be viewed as such because that's how our culture views people.

All I know is I'm done after this, I've wasted way too much time on this already. I gave him the links and if he is too pigheaded to look and actually read at what these people are saying, it's a lost cause to continue.

[–]Comatoast 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

He's just busting out those internet buzzwords like they're gumballs in a vending machine and he's got a pocketful of quarters. If he won't respect you enough to even read the data you pulled together to make it easier for his hard-headed ass, then he doesn't deserve to further converse with you. I have mixed feelings on a stranger contacting you only AFTER you were banned from Facebook. Be sure to watch out for yourself on there, it's so much more exposed than places like saidit.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

Oh just to clear it up, I got banned from a Facebook group, not Facebook as a whole but yeah I just have nothing left to say to this guy since he kept shooting down all my points and references making it essentially "Well like, that's just your opinion" and when he said he wouldn't look at the websites or look into Ray Blanchard, I just mentally threw in the towel. I just found it funny how he tried to guilt trip me using my race and sexual orientation saying that "I'd think a gay minority would be more understanding towards marginalized groups" lol. And that's the thing, I think because I am gender nonconforming, I feel like people like me can see through the trans ideology even more since we do disrupt gender norms, like I've heard similar from non-conforming lesbians as well.

[–]Comatoast 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Yeaahh, they use those shitty tactics against women too. Everyone is supposed to dive down the rabbithole of oppression olympics and recognize how awful they must have it over everyone else, but make sure that there's enough guilt there to pull you in. They're time vampires.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

"Time Vampires" is the best word to describe them haha.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 0 fun5 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Let me guess, douche bro is white, better yet a hipster and grew up in the suburbs?

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't know actually, he had no picture of himself but I wouldn't be surprised if he was exactly what you described lol.

[–][deleted] 7 insightful - 2 fun7 insightful - 1 fun8 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

Who is this guy and why are you wasting your time with him? Put that energy convincing other women or your representatives. Some random jackass on the internet doesn’t need your labor.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (0 children)

It's just some guy who messaged me on my personal FB asking why I got banned from a group. At the time I didn't know why I was banned and he said he's ask the moderator why and then he confronted me asking me if I was "tranpshobic" because that was the reason why I got banned from the group. And we kinda just got into this conversation turned debate. You're right that I shouldn't be wasting anymore time with him, especially if he won't even look at the sources I'm linking to explain my points.

[–]yishengqingwa666 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

http://www.sciencemag.org/news/2015/11/brains-men-and-women-aren-t-really-different-study-finds

https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn28582-scans-prove-theres-no-such-thing-as-a-male-or-female-brain

http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053811915007697

https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnhum.2018.00399/full

https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-019-00677-x

https://www.cambridgeindependent.co.uk/whats-on/the-neuroscientist-shattering-the-myth-of-the-gendered-brain-9086242/

https://theconversation.com/brain-scientists-havent-been-able-to-find-major-differences-between-womens-and-mens-brains-despite-over-a-century-of-searching-143516

AND

https://outofmypantiesnow.wordpress.com/2013/10/28/when-is-90-not-substantially-all/

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Oh I remember seeing a couple of these articles and studies on the original GC reddit before it got taken down, Thanks for this list, I'm definitely gonna bookmark them this time around though when it comes to explaining crimes committed against women by trans-identified men, I'm just gonna link to the articles instead of the compilation websites so people will stop using the excuse of "it's a biased website".

[–]crodish 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

They ALWAYS do this!! It's so fucking maddening.

"This never happens!"

"Here's proof it does."

"Okay but those are like outliers."

"Here's proof it does, in spades."

"Okay now that's ChErRyPiCkInG"

LIKE HELLO?!?!!?!?

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Exactly LOL These people always come up with excuses. They ask for proof, you give them proof, and it's never good enough because they know they can't combat it. That's why "This Never Happens" has that name because of people like these.

[–]luckystar 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

The problem I have is that if a source is too "TERFy" for people they won't even read the link. Womenarehuman has a lot of fantastic data gathered on it but if you send somebody who considers themselves "woke" a link that calls a trans woman a "trans identifying man" they will immediately be turned off because they think misgendering is violence or whatever.

If they're just a generic Democrat type person (ie they believe TWAW because they've been told it's the correct progressive view to have, but they haven't really deeply thought about the issues) I've found you CAN turn people around, or at least open their minds to thinking about the issues in a more multifaceted manner, by showing the most relevant cases like Emilia Decaudin, Rachel McKinnon, Riley Dennis and so on＊. But I have had to collate the information sources on these people together on my own because I simply can't link a "TERF website" to a left leaning friend without them shutting down as their knee jerk reaction.

Sending info from neutral sources or mainstream media and then discussing the case from as objective an angle I can manage (it's really hard to reduce my own personal bias in these things but I try my best) and just asking questions and letting the other person come to their own conclusions on their own. It might not happen over the course of one conversation and you don't wanna keep bringing it up so many times they get sick of hearing about it, but if it does come up it's important to push back and at least give them information they can process on their own if nothing else.

If they've drunk so much of the woke kool aid that they don't see any problem with the people mentioned above, then they're probably a lost cause and you might want to cut your losses and disengage, if only for you own mental well being.

＊You can try more extreme examples like J. Yaniv, Chris Chan, Stefonknee, Fallon Fox, but many people will say "that's just one weird pervert, every group has a few bad apples"; it also doesn't help that most trans people themselves have distanced themselves from the Yaniv types. I've found the people I listed above are generally applauded and praised for their "trans activism" and they act in ways that are very obviously damaging to women that are almost impossible to support in good faith.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The problem I have is that if a source is too "TERFy" for people they won't even read the link. Womenarehuman has a lot of fantastic data gathered on it but if you send somebody who considers themselves "woke" a link that calls a trans woman a "trans identifying man" they will immediately be turned off because they think misgendering is violence or whatever.

Right, another commenter suggested that I just link to the articles themselves and not the compilation websites so they'll be less likely to use the "It's a TERFweb site" excuse so I'm gonna be trying that method from now. It's just ridiculous that they write these sites off as "TERFY". "This Never Happens" was created because people like these were thinking that attacks on women by trans-identified men was a myth and WomenAreHuman was doing this too. It's just disappointing that I can't use those sources because like you said, they have really good data archives, especially WomenAreHuman, it's set up to where you can find anything in a neat organized fashion.

I feel the big problem when trying to explain these things is that people will just think of the HSTS gay men who are on average, no where near as big a threat to women unlike AGPs. The people think that because HSTS are not targeting and harassing women (at least compared to AGP, I haven't really come across any stories of a HSTS attacking a woman), it means that these people are "True trans". And so for that, people will just say that guys like Riley Dennis, Rachel Mckinnon, and Emilia Decaudin are "Outliers" and "don't represent trans people" using the "bad apple" analogy like you mentioned.

I mean, I'm a feminine nonconforming man myself but I find it a bit mentally taxing when it comes to trying to explain why certain trans-identified men (The HSTS) are not assaulting women but just because they aren't assaulting women doesn't make them any more "True trans" than the creepy AGP. But it's hard to form into words sometimes I must admit. And I think for the people who do know a trans-identified man who doesn't act creepy or dominating of conversation, they don't want to discredit their friend and think they are not what they are claiming to be (via women). So they'll focus on their friend and not on the bigger issue and these people are probably the ones who will never really come around.

And right, you definitely won't be changing minds in a day and I'm aware, the goal is to at least get these people to see the other side and considering thinking more critically on what's happening with this trans ideology. It's a slow process but it can be worth it to plant the seeds sortaspeak.

[–]Terfenclaw 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Show him this for his "cherry picking." https://ucicorrections.seweb.uci.edu/files/2013/06/A-Demographic-Assessment-of-Transgender-Inmates-in-Mens-Prisons.pdf

20% of transgender inmates in male prisons are sex offenders. Compared to 15% for biological men.

[–]PassionateIntensity 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The UK and Canada are at 48% and 50% self-ID-ed transwomen are sex offenders (2017-onwards).

I was going to say, I wonder why it's not as large in California, then I noticed the dates. That data is from the early 2000s, analyzed in 2009. IMO sex offenders just hadn't caught on the great new scam for privileges yet. Does anyone know if there are California numbers from 2017-onwards? I searched but couldn't find them. I wager it's closer to 40% now.

[–]Maeven 3 insightful - 1 fun3 insightful - 0 fun4 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

You're not going to persuade everyone. Sometimes the best thing to do is walk away.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yeah true, that's why I'm ending it after this. I'm really just engaging in this stuff because I'm trying to practice and strengthen my points. Like I know what I want to say but I have to remember to not get flustered when the person is being dismissive of the evidence I try to show lol

[–]Delia 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

Tell him to date a transgender women or is he transphobic, you see guys like him have got nothing to lose have they? I would get him out of your life and when he ask why, just say you are women phobic. See how he likes it.

[–]yishengqingwa666 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Yep, woke misogynist beardos and TIMs deserve each other, they sure as HELL don't deserve the company or friendship of any woman.

[–]Eurowoman24 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

lmao I'd love him to share those studies of trans women having female brains. It's a thing mostly in terms of small structural differences but the differences are really minor. It's not the hill they want to die on, how can males have a female brain when they are practically the same apart from their interactions with the rest of our bodies.

[–]Kai_Decadence[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

He thinks that the observation that some men have the same structural similarities of that as a woman is proof that there is a female brain. What he's not understanding even when I tried to address it is that these minor structural similarities are found in homosexual men and not straight men, at least according to Ray Blanchard's study that I've read.

[–]Eurowoman24 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

that's funny in class we were just told that members of the female sex have it, but the brain is basically considered a gender neutral organ because the differences are so minor. Also not every female has that which is also why the idea of male/female brains aren't taken that seriously

[–]PassionateIntensity 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

It's been ages since I went over these neuroscience studies but people need to realize the vague-ness is obscuring explanations. For example, one important "small structural difference" was that transwomen had more reactivate amygdalas--which process fear/threat responses. That doesn't mean they were born with lady brains-- it's a response to the environment! or perceived environment. Yes, women on average have larger ones -- so do gay men, child abuse victims, and Republicans (versus Democrats). Funny when that "fear prone Republicans" paper came out the media didn't claim they had feminized brains.