you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]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.

[–]RationalNeutral 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (2 children)

No doubt, if you had spent as long as I have deprived of the freedom to express femininity you would come across that way too.

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

That's about the most male response you could've come up with, LOL. The freedom to express femininity sounds like the title of a how-to book or video series for AGPs. But it reminds me of these gals in their baggy trousers and brogues back in the day: https://youtu.be/pehMBaHgpWE

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

Thanks for pointing this out.

If I ever write a book about my transgender experiences (I doubt I will), I'll be sure to use that title then. Unlike some transgender people, I am not a fan of revisionist history writing. The fact I spent as many years presenting masculinely is more something to learn from and/or use to my advantage rather than to discard or outright ignore completely.