Challenging gender "education": where do you even begin?

submitted by teacherterf from self.GenderCritical

A few months ago, I asked for advice on how to handle an upcoming workplace training session on gender:

https://saidit.net/s/GenderCritical/comments/70qm/learning_about_gender_workplace_training/

I've since attended the training. The presenter was a female they/them who spoke very earnestly about her journey toward self-actualization through imposing pronoun use on others. Some hightlights of the "lesson":

  • icebreaker asking us when we knew our gender identities and how we express them. We didn't discuss this in groups or anything, it was just "something to think about"
  • definitions of words like "cisgender" and "cisnormativity"
  • there are way more trans people than ever before, and that's because we're more accepting of trans people
  • 41% of trans people have tried to kill themselves and the life expectancy of a trans person is 35
  • stories about how affirmed various genderspecials felt when their handpicked pronouns were used. The word "euphoria" came up
  • the f*cking gender unicorn
  • handwringing over gender reveal parties, which our nonbinary host hates very very much (I am not a fan of gender reveal parties myself, but find the genderist fixation on them misguided and over-the-top. Yes, they're tacky; no, they're not literally killing trans people; in the hierarchy of "damaging practices the reinforce the gender binary", serving pink or blue sponge cake ranks pretty low)
  • testimonials from our nonbinary host, who was 35 or something before she realized that ("unlike other girls", being the subtext) she wasn't actually very feminine and therefore didn't belong in the "she/her" "box"
  • instructions on how to add our pronouns to our Zoom screen names, so that everyone would know what boxes we boring cis normies belonged in
  • the importance of finding out our students' pronouns in exactly the right way because we don't want to force anyone to out themselves

Finally we had 10-15 minutes for a Q&A. Everyone else's questions were along the lines of "how can I do better" and I felt like a heathen at Sunday school. I am not proud to say that despite everyone's great ideas in the linked thread, I went full deer-in-headlights. The torrent of half-truths, non-truths, inconsistencies, and flat-out word salad was overwhelming. And I'm increasingly convinced that this is the entire point. Assault people's critical faculties with content that cannot be engaged with critically. I've had productive conversations about this stuff with fence-sitters and even with true believers. If this were a conversation - presenter speaks for a minute and then people can respond point-by-point - I am sure that it would have gone completely differently.

This was an optional workshop, and it was clear that the vast majority of attendees were true believers. I'm not beating myself up too hard over having frozen, because for now this nonsense is confined to back-patting exercises with people who voluntarily sign up for it. To the extent that gender ideology has come up in my professional life, I've been able to ignore it and it has gone away. (I could teach a workshop on avoiding third person pronouns entirely.) But it's just a matter of time before trainings like this become required, and I want to be better prepared. Who here has had experience cutting through the nonsense in this kind of format, and what can you recommend?

all 42 comments
sorted by:
top
newinsightfulfun

[–]NeedMoreCoffee 14 insightful - 1 fun14 insightful - 0 fun15 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

I feel like we should use our words aswel and start calling them sex deniers, gender ideologues and talk about their dogmas. Talk about how it's a cult.

Talk about the BITE model

[–]Femaleisnthateful 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (5 children)

LOL isn't it funny how the gender training is so predictable any of us could teach it ourselves?

The trans mental health thing jumps out at me as the most glaring and internally inconsistent. There are more trans people than ever before because of public acceptance, but also half of them try to kill themselves and their life expectancy is abysmally short (did 'they' explain why)? I don't recall the LGB community being this dysfunctional, despite experiencing overt discrimination and violence.

I don't have experience with this training myself, but I'm mentally steeling myself for when I will have to. I think the best way forward, since we're familiar with all the arguments, is to come prepared with research notes which debunk the 'facts' put forward in the training.

I would have liked to ask 'them' what criteria or characteristics define a person as a specific 'gender identity'. It slays me that these people rail against the 'gender binary' while deliberately reinforcing it.

[–]MarkTwainiac 15 insightful - 1 fun15 insightful - 0 fun16 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

There are more trans people than ever before because of public acceptance, but also half of them try to kill themselves and their life expectancy is abysmally short (did 'they' explain why)? I don't recall the LGB community being this dysfunctional, despite experiencing overt discrimination and violence.

Even during the AIDS crisis when gay men in large numbers were being struck down in the prime of life and dying horrible, excruciating deaths, activists in countries like the US and UK didn't set out to make the situation seem worse by telling gay men that their average life expectancy was 35 - and that if they didn't die of AIDS, they'd still be highly likely to try killing themselves.

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

Were closeted LGB at such a risk of suicide if they remained in the closet and did not openly express their sexual preference?

Also I have to imagine that the generational increase in empathy over time is proving to result in different activism as well. Although, that appears to be lost upon this sub.

[–]MarkTwainiac 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (1 child)

Were closeted LGB at such a risk of suicide if they remained in the closet and did not openly express their sexual preference?

You're presuming that "LGB" were/are "at such risk of suicide" - a phrase that has no meaning. Are you claiming that "LGB" generally have higher rates of suicide than straight people - and across the board? Or higher rates of suicidal threats, thoughts, or ideation, or urges, or plans, or attempts - or all or some of these? Can you provide the exact stats and sources for whatever it is that you're claiming?

BTW, researchers studying suicide who know what they're doing would not characterize "LGB" people as one undifferentiated mass.

For the record, most of the research on suicidal thoughts, attempts and completed acts amongst homosexuals that's been done over the course of decades has focused on male homosexuals. And it's found that the time in life when male homosexuals are most likely to think of suicide is when they are realizing their sexual orientation and grappling with coming out, or in the process of coming out. Which in most cases means when they are adolescents or very young adults. Today in 2021, the USA's CDC says that "gay, bisexual, and other men who have sex with men" are more likely to attempt suicide than their heterosexual peers "especially before the age of 25."

IIRC, recent surveys of adolescents in grades 7 through 12 in the US lumped together under the heading "LGBTQ" have found that the sub-groups that report the highest rates of suicidal thoughts are girls (or "AFAB"s) who are exclusively same-sex attracted or bi.

But as I'm sure you know, suicidal thoughts are not the same as suicide attempts, and neither thoughts nor attempts are the same as acts of suicide. Whilst a significant number of adolescents and young adults who are gay, lesbian and bi - and who are heterosexual too - report thinking of suicide and how they might commit suicide, and the rates of suicide have gone up in recent years amongst young people as it has amongst all age groups, the statistics over time show that suicide occurs most commonly in older age groups. Though the figures change from year to year, generally speaking, the rates of completed suicide increase with age. And people under 25 have by far the lowest rates of suicide.

In 2019, the suicide rates were higher among adults ages 45 to 54 years (19.60 per 100,000) and 55 to 64 years (19.41 per 100,000), with the rate highest among adults ages 85 years or older (20.12 per 100,000), the only age group with a rate increase from 19.07 in 2018 to 20.12 in 2019.

Younger groups have had consistently lower suicide rates than middle-aged and older adults. In 2019, adolescents and young adults aged 15 to 24 had a suicide rate of 13.95.

https://afsp.org/suicide-statistics/ https://www.prb.org/suicides/

Interestingly, during the height of AIDS crisis, whilst there was an uptick of suicides amongst some gay diagnosed with HIV, there was no huge rise. Moreover, HIV poz men who committed suicide typically had not yet developed full-blown AIDS. There actually were fewer suicides amongst gay men with AIDS that researchers expected to find. A popular saying amongst gay men back then was, "we aren't dying of AIDS, we're living with AIDS."

I have to imagine that the generational increase in empathy over time is proving to result in different activism as well.

What "generational increase in empathy"? Please provide the evidence that there's been an increase. And please specify the generations involved in the studies, as well as the specific methods researchers have used to detect and measure empathy, that show empathy has increased. Please also be clear about which particular groups in the population supposedly have more empathy now than in the past, and state exactly which particular groups they supposedly have more empathy.

Social attitudes expressed online & in the mass media; the rates of male violence and harassment against girls & women; the popularity of porn & particularly porn in which women are degraded & harmed; the ways males of younger generations treat their female sex partners during sex & the sex acts they expect & demand of them; the increasing rates at which younger men are of assaulting, raping & murdering old women - often with overkill; the demonization of girls & women who stand up for our rights, spaces and sports - and many other factors suggest that if anything, there has been a marked generational decline in empathy towards the 51% of the human race that's female.

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

I asked a question for more information and was not really making a claim with this comment, for the record.

What I'm trying to ask really is, "Is suicide as much of a concern for Gay, Lesbian, or Bisexual people?"

There is no claim being made here, I just have no idea about their circumstances and am asking.

Obviously, if it isn't as much of a concern that may explain why it wasn't a statistic of interest to activism at the time.

Re: Generational increase in empathy

This is a general personal observation, I do not know how someone would quantifiably or empirically go about proving or disproving this. Nor do I really have any interest in proving or disproving that notion.

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

I thought of a lot of questions along those lines. My concern was that I didn't want to get too philosophical. A big part of the reason I don't want to challenge the nuts and bolts of these claims is that I already think that gender identity "education" lies well outside our mandate as a school and I don't want to send the message that we need to spend even more time discussing it. We should treat all students with dignity and respect, certainly, but this does not require us to believe what all of our students believe. Somehow this goes without saying in the case of religion - I am able to treat my Christian students with dignity and respect even though I do not believe that Jesus Christ was the son of God, and I've never had to attend workshop training that was geared at changing my religious beliefs - but not in the case of gender. So, yes, gender identity is incoherent as a concept and I'm sure they/them wouldn't have had a good answer to your question, but other than acting as a gotcha, this is rather beside the point. Similarly, I could, for instance, challenge their claims about puberty blockers, but again - we're not a medical institution, and I don't want to spend time discussing an issue that has nothing to do with our professional lives.

[–]our_team_is_winning 9 insightful - 3 fun9 insightful - 2 fun10 insightful - 3 fun -  (2 children)

I sure hope you have a GREAT paying job to make it worth enduring that. These are totalitarian "struggle sessions" -- male sexual fetish meets Maoism.

the life expectancy of a trans person is 35

AGPs seem to start wearing their wives clothes AFTER 35 though. Bruce Jenner should have died twice by now with that math. This CULT needs to be stood up to. Women need to REFUSE to listen to this and SUE SUE SUE that it's sexual harassment in the workplace. Where are the actual feminist lawyers to sue these companies who bring this BS in?

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

"Where are the feminist lawyers?"

Ahhhh, every local lawyer who calls herself a feminist is 100% on board with this stuff. Some even have side gigs conducting these kinds of trainings themselves. The nonbinary presenter calls herself a feminist and is generally recognized as one. My town is fully captured.

[–][deleted] 4 insightful - 3 fun4 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Selling their souls to make sure someone doesn't get their feelings hurt.

[–]one1won 3 insightful - 3 fun3 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 3 fun -  (23 children)

OMG. Thank you so much for this post! I cringed and laughed. Well written!

I view you as a wise and brave person to subject yourself to this BEFORE it may become mandatory. Get the shock experience under your belt, so to speak!

Being out of the workforce, myself, I can only hone in on:

there are way more trans people than ever before, and that's because we're more accepting of trans people

Then we need to stop being accepting! Hmmmm

[–]teacherterf[S] 7 insightful - 3 fun7 insightful - 2 fun8 insightful - 3 fun -  (22 children)

Thank you! As for "way more trans people", my takeaway from that one along with the next bullet point was "oh, so we're seeing a huge increase of a type of person that has a 41% chance of attempting suicide AND THIS IS A GOOD THING???"

[–]one1won 3 insightful - 2 fun3 insightful - 1 fun4 insightful - 2 fun -  (1 child)

I've got to ask, did you squeak, jaw drop, or face plant at any point during this? I would've

[–]teacherterf[S] 5 insightful - 3 fun5 insightful - 2 fun6 insightful - 3 fun -  (0 children)

Constantly and repeatedly, but it was Zoom and my camera was off and my mic was muted. Enduring one of these in person will be a challenge.

[–]RationalNeutral 1 insightful - 2 fun1 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 2 fun -  (19 children)

The general idea is not that the actual raw number of transgender people has changed, just that the number of people who are feeling comfortable enough to be open / out and accepting treatment is increasing. If you had a group of 50 transgender people, and in hostile society 40 of them stayed in the closet, then this same hostile society became more accepting and suddenly only 10 are staying in the closet. You'd still have 50 transgender people in either circumstance. Just in a hostile society with 40 closeted people, those 40 people are in that high risk of suicide category, with only 10 open people properly receiving treatment. Meanwhile with the accepting society you only have 10 people in that high-risk of suicide category with 40 people openly receiving treatment. Overall in the more accepting society the suicide rate will go down.

[–]MarkTwainiac 10 insightful - 1 fun10 insightful - 0 fun11 insightful - 1 fun -  (7 children)

The general idea is not that the actual raw number of transgender people has changed, just that the number of people who are feeling comfortable enough to be open / out and accepting treatment is increasing.

If this were the case, then we'd see female humans coming out as trans across all age groups like we see amongst males. But that's not happening.

Nearly all the females identifying as trans nowadays are teenagers and young women in their 20s. Moreover, the numbers of girls & young women seeking treatment at gender clinics has skyrocketed in the past decade. In the UK, for example, the number of girls under 18 seeking help for "gender dypshoria" increased by more than 4,400% since 2009.

If greater tolerance were the factor here, then in recent years a large cohort of middle-aged, senior and elderly women, including heterosexual mothers and grans, would have announced they are transmen on a scale equivalent to - or at least approaching - the huge number of heterosexual dads and grand dads who've announced they are transwomen. But, in fact, there are no female counterparts to the vast number of straight middle-aged and older fathers who've declared that they are women in recent years like Caitlyn Jenner, Jennifer Pritzker, Rachel Levine, Zoey Tur, Debbie Hayton, India Willoughby, Jennifer Finney Boylan and the thousands more like them.

Despite the climate of greater tolerance - indeed, of celebration - hardly any women have come out as trans in middle-age or later, in fact. And the very few that have, like Masha Gessen, are lesbians, not heterosexuals like the bulk of the males in and past middle age.

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

Thanks for this. After some unproductive back-and-forths, I blocked the person you're replying to.

Re this:

If greater tolerance were the factor here, then in recent years a large cohort of middle-aged, senior and elderly women, including heterosexual mothers and grans, would have announced they are transmen on a scale equivalent to - or at least approaching - the huge number of heterosexual dads and grand dads who've announced they are transwomen.

Anecdotally, I have seen an uptick in middle-aged women declaring genderspecial identities. Usually they identify as nonbinary rather than "male", and none have the status of Jenner or Mock or Clymer. They seem to have a few things in common: they're white, they're plain-looking, they've always been at the cutting edge of trendy causes, their lives are not as interesting as they'd wanted for themselves, and they've always thought of themselves as being cooler than their age-peers. Usually they don't get hormones or surgery, or if they do, it's to achieve a "gender-neutral" look that still registers as female. Usually the extent of their identity is telling people what words to use to talk about them. I know one such woman in her 40s, and she has a tumblr that looks like it belongs a 15yo. I wonder if this is the female version of the AGP midlife crisis: older, immature white women distinguishing themselves from their out-of-touch peers (who are all Karens) in a way that is accessible to them, and that plenty of people will not only accept at face value but celebrate them for.

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

That's interesting about the women. The whole identity label thing is so alien to me. It seems so silly, juvenile & superficial - and it draws in those who are insecurity & heightens their insecurity. Social media is bringing out the absolute worst in our species.

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

Yeah, I have some sympathy for teenagers who carry on this way. Teenagers are still figuring things out, and identity struggles are part of adolescence. I still think we'd avoid a lot of the excesses of this movement if adults responded by smiling and saying "mmm, that's nice" and moved on rather than falling over themselves to "affirm" every 14yo who declared that she was too special to be a she/her. Middle-aged women who do this are past the point where they can grow out of it, and I do everything I can to avoid spending more time with them than I have to.

[–]RationalNeutral 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (3 children)

I don't understand how that correlation exists in your mind when historically the MtF transgender has been far more stigmatized than the FtM transgender. If not, quite regularly, the FtM transgender population gets almost entirely ignored because it is inconvenient for much of the propaganda that specifically attacks MtF transgender people in order to attack the transgender population as a whole.

[–]MarkTwainiac 6 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 0 fun7 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

historically the MtF transgender has been far more stigmatized than the FtM transgender.

In the 1960s MtF super celebrities like Christine Jorgensen and Candy Darling were stigmatized? World famous MtFs who "transitioned" in the 1970s like Jan Morris and Renee Richards were stigmatized? Really? I recall that all those persons were lionized. The press fawned over them. Morris and Richards in particular only gained social cachet and clout from becoming trans. Like Dave Thomas of the UK, a has-been noted snob & misogynistic journalist whose work no one was interested in anymore announced at 62 that he was really a woman, and suddenly the new writing assignments and publishing contracts came pouring in: voila, a weekly autobiographical feature-length column in the Sunday Telegraph documenting his "transition," and a book deal too. Plus, he's now doing fashion shoots. For women's mags. Stigmatized my ass.

the FtM transgender population gets almost entirely ignored because it is inconvenient for much of the propaganda that specifically attacks MtF transgender people in order to attack the transgender population as a whole.

Nah, mate, those of us who are women and feminists are not the ones who ignore TIFs. Most of us know quite a few personally, and know of others. Many of us have daughters, grand daughters, nieces, students, neighbors, acquaintances who are TIFs - or were. Many of the younger women here have friends, siblings, school mates, ex-lovers who are TIFs, or were.

"Trans allies" and TIMs are the ones who ignore TIFs, and a main reason is sexism and male supremacy. In the new social hierarchy, TIMs are top dog, the new sacred caste. Men don't lose their superior status when they go trans. Today, many gain status, becoming vaunted and praiseworthy just by donning a dress and mimicking the most superficial and sexist sex stereotypes.

TIFs only get attention from TRAs, TIMs and all the trans allies in the MSM and establishment circles when TIFs have babies & lobby for anti-woman policies (Freddie McConnell), when they serve as handmaidens for TIMs (Chase Strangio of the ACLU, for example, suing & lobbying for the right of males to get into girls/women's sports, women's shelters, women's prisons, women's loos), or they can be used as stalking horses (Gavin Grimm) and the proverbial thin wedge to make way for males invading female spaces.

the propaganda that specifically attacks MtF transgender people in order to attack the transgender population as a whole.

Women are defending the rights, sports, spaces, services and programs we fought hard for, and many of which we built from the ground up with no help from government & business. No women's rights advocate has ever assaulted a TIM. Though many TIMs have assaulted & raped women (and children), and some have even killed women. Women standing up for ourselves and our rights is not an attack on you personally or transgender persons. Pointing out the many conflicts between the demands of trans activists and the rights of women/girls and the safeguarding of children/the vulnerable is not the same as attacking people.

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

Interesting.

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

One question: If a FTM transgender person tries to help a kid (and within reason does not act like a total creep in the process) will they be made out to be a complete predator?

[–]teacherterf[S] 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (10 children)

According to the presenter, the attempted suicide rate in our more accepting culture is 41%. What was it 10 years ago, when there were - conservative estimates - 1/10 as many out trans people as there are now? Even if it was 100%, that means that for every suicidal trans person in 2011, there are 4 suicidal trans people today. This is alarming.

[–]Archie 5 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 0 fun6 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

I don't disagree with your remarks - but the 41% stat of the presenter is wrong, so this is a moot point. That infamous 41% stat is from a study with 27 self-reported samples. A bit ridiculous to base a world view on this.

Interestingly while we're talking about trans suicid, multiple recent studies support that surgery actually does not lower suicid rates. This could be a sign that we should try to adress the issue through other methods.

[–]RationalNeutral 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (8 children)

On the one hand, you seem to be throwing numbers out at random hoping it sticks rather than doing actual math, but if you'd like to more carefully explain how you got a 4x ratio from that information, I'm happy to read your next attempt at statistics and respond to that rather than attempt to connect your dots for you.

One thing you don't seem to be comprehending very well is sampling bias. 10 years ago, if 1/10 as many transgender people were out, then that other 9/10 would not come forward and be known to be transgender or able to be factored in statistics.

On the other hand, our current culture is not very accepting at all, it is increasingly becoming more accepting, but still a long ways off. As acceptance increases the suicide attempt rate will likely decrease. This is because suicide risk for transgender patients falls to national baseline levels after starting to transition.

The 41% statistic is a "Have you attempted suicide at least once in your life if you are transgender?" statistic. For most transgender people, that attempt was prior to transitioning.

[–]teacherterf[S] 5 insightful - 2 fun5 insightful - 1 fun6 insightful - 2 fun -  (7 children)

LOL that a TRA is lecturing me on interpreting data, but, whatever:

If 10x as many trans people are out today than 10 years ago and there was a 100% attempted suicide rate back then, then for every 100 out trans people in 10 years ago, we'd have:

  • 100 attempted suicides among out trans people 10 years ago (100%)

  • 1000 out trans people today (10x as many)

  • 41% of whom have attempted suicide, making 41% of 1000 = 410 attempted suicides of out trans people today.

That's a ratio of 4.1, which I rounded down to 4 in my post. You're welcome to apologize to me for condescending to me when I was right, or I can block you. Your call!

As for "fewer people were out back then, so attempted suicides wouldn't be factored into statistics" - this is true. However, overall attempted suicide rates have increased, not decreased over the past decade. In the absence of evidence to the contrary it is standard practice in statistics to assume that attempted suicides among subsets of different populations, in this case trans people 10 years ago vs today, would follow similar trends as the general populations. The burden of proof is on you, not me, to show that trans people within a less-suicidal general population were in fact significantly more suicidal than trans people within a more suicidal general population. I'm open to reviewing data.

And your "suicide risk for transgender patients falls to national baseline levels after starting to transition" claim is also garbage: the most comprehensive data on this is from Sweden, which is among the more accepting countries for trans people. According to that study, for trans people who completed transition, the rate of completed suicide was found to be higher, by an estimated factor of twenty, than it was among the general population: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0016885

I think that's everything.

[–]RationalNeutral 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (6 children)

The main problem with your premise is that with a 100% attempted suicide rate, a population of 1,000 out transgender people would result in 1,000 attempted suicides, using your own assumptions to compare similar population sizes a decade apart would support a claim of decreasing suicide risk.

Alternatively worded to be more clear:

Your assumption of 100% suicide attempts would be a 100 attempts per 100 people rate. The 41% statistic would then be 41 attempts per 100 people rate. As 41 is smaller than 100, this would be a decrease.

This would actually be a ratio of 0.41

If 1,000 is your favorite population size, then 1,000 to 410 attempts, respectively.

More bluntly 100% > 41%.

Should I continue? You've made it clear that anything but an apology would result in being blocked. If you're not going to read past this point, I don't know if it is worth the time typing out the rest of the flaws in your argument. Although, as it stands this reckless incompetence with statistical analysis is pretty jarring on its own merits.

[–]teacherterf[S] 4 insightful - 2 fun4 insightful - 1 fun5 insightful - 2 fun -  (5 children)

More bluntly, 100% > 41%

Yeeeeeah and we're done here. You are neither rational nor neutral. 41% of 1000 > 100% of 100. You need to compare the actual numbers of suicidal people. You're the one who needs to show that a decade ago, the raw number of closeted trans people who were attempting suicide was so large as to eclipse the number of trans people (both closeted and out) who are attempting suicide today. That's the only thing that would support your "there are fewer attempted suicides among trand people today than 10 years ago" claim.

But you're either not interested in doing that or not able to do that (probably both; your confidence in your analytical skills is completely unmoored from the reality), so, buh-bye.

[–]RationalNeutral 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (4 children)

  1. I do not believe I made a claim, I was trying to explain how to correctly understand basic statistical information.

  2. We are talking about suicide rates which is a number that scales with the size of the population that is why it is expressed as a percentage or a X per Y number of people thing. A suicide rate actually has useful meaning for describing the likelihood someone afflicted with some circumstance may actually attempt suicide. The reason for this is because it paints a picture of the probability of suicidal ideation independent of the population size of the group in question.

Using raw numbers, as you have, has no real use for characterizing the risk of suicide without transitioning explicitly because it is dependent on population size.

The whole point of constructing an argument is to try and remove unrelated information from an argument whereas you are constructing the entirety of your argument from unrelated information.

This would be like trying to argue that a farm treats its chickens well because it has 1000 chickens rather than actually looking at anything of substance to determine whether or not it treats its chickens well.

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

Your posts are so obviously male.

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

The torrent of half-truths, non-truths, inconsistencies, and flat-out word salad was overwhelming. And I'm increasingly convinced that this is the entire point. Assault people's critical faculties with content that cannot be engaged with critically.

Exactly this. Any actual thought is suspiciously terfy.

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

I wish I had something useful to add about cutting through, but I think you nailed it about the format. Trainings are top down, and these in particular are aimed at programming people to think the way they want them too. The one I went to recently made it seem like if you are not on board yet, it is because you are behind the times and in need of more programming. The one I went to was mandatory, but the "how can I do better?" reaction was similar. I did not try to challenge anything, but my sense is that since these trainings appeal to emotion instead of reason, the best pushback might be that which also focuses on emotional appeals.